| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
Interestingly enough, Graham's proposal is in direct contrast to the ASTM (American Society of Testing and Materials), which only allows one representative from one organisation to be a voting member of committees (membership is by individuals). The other aspect to ensure appropriate voting is that a committee must have a balanced mix of producers, users, consumers, and general interest (e.g. government and academia). These may not quite work for our activity but I think that there is a useful principle here. I believe that both of these ideas would be more manageable than Graham's ideas; very few of us seem to have sufficient official blessing for our participation from our organisations to allow us to wield block votes.
As ever,
Tim.
-----Original Message-----
From: Horn, Graham [SMTP:graham.horn@aihw.gov.au]
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2001 2:37 AM
To: 'Schoening, James R CECOM DCSC4I'; Standard-Upper-Ontology (E-mail)
Subject: SUO: RE: Establishing voting rights
Jim,
. I could see some merit in recognising the greater, but not
overwhelming, significance of relevant corporate / government institutions.
What I have in mind is that significant institutions could otherwise either
be ignored, or alternatively swamp, a group such as this. I would see the
aim as to have appropriate weightings given to the voice of larger bodies,
without loosing the value of insights and opinions of individuals.
. My impression is that is generally handled by giving such
institutions voting rights corresponding to a number, say 5 or 10,
individual members, to be used at the institution's discretion, such as
according votes to individual representatives or delegating a corporate
vote. In view of the absence of membership fees to this group, SUO members
should perhaps be obliged to declare financial relationships (eg.
employment, contract, etc.) with member institutions as a marker of
representation.
Cheers Graham Horn
National Data Standards Unit
Australian Institute of Health and Welfare
================================================
Phone: 02.6244.1094
Fax: 02.6244.1199
E
-----Original Message-----
From: Schoening, James R CECOM DCSC4I
[mailto:James.Schoening@mail1.monmouth.army.mil]
Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2001 11:23 AM
To: Standard-Upper-Ontology (E-mail)
Subject: SUO: Establishing voting rights
> SUO Participants:
>
> Now that our project has officially been chartered by IEEE (IEEE
> P1600.1 Standard Upper Ontology Working Group), we need to establish
> voting rights.
>
> Default Policies & Procedures (P&Ps) are provided to us by the IEEE
> Computer Society Standards Activity Board (see
> http://www.computer.org/standards/ORIENT/p&ptoc.htm) but these do not
> specify voting rights within a working group. Rights in most standards
> groups are based on attendance at meetings (usually 2 of 3 prior
> meetings), but since this group is working via email reflectors, we'll
> need to establish our own rules.
>
> I propose the following:
>
> SUO Voting Rights Clause:
>
> Voting rights shall be granted to any individual with a material interest
> in the development of this standard who either was a participant of this
> group during its formation (see para. d.) or has been a participant for a
> waiting period of 6-months.
>
> a. 'Voting Rights' refers to the list of who may vote on formal
> ballots taken by the SUO WG. If an individual does not have voting rights,
> he or she may still submit comments on a vote and participate in
> discussions to resolve those comments.
>
> b. 'Material Interest' is defined (still seeking a definition for
> this)
>
> c. A 'participant' is any individual (IEEE membership NOT required
> or expected) who submits an application
> (http://suo.ieee.org/SUO-Participants-Jan2001.xls) and participates in any
> one of the following ways (subscribes to any SUO discussion list, posts
> messages to lists, comments on documents, or any other actions the Chair
> deems to be participation).
>
> d. Voting rights will be granted dfathered to all those who
> participated in this WG prior to Jan 9, 2001 and who submit an application
> form within 30 days of announcement of approval of this clause. New
> participants must submit the application and then wait 6-months.
>
End of Clause.
The 6-month waiting period is consistent with the typical
'attendance at 2 of 3 prior meetings' rule and is needed to avoid an influx
of voters members to sway a particular vote.
> Comments are requested on the above proposed clause. Anyone else is
> welcome to submit their own version or approach to this need. Since we
> haven't established voting rights, we can't very well take a formal vote
> on this clause, so let's just work through any comments and see if we can
> reach consensus.
>
Jim Schoening