Thread Links Date Links
Thread Prev Thread Next Thread Index Date Prev Date Next Date Index

Re: SUO: Status of SUMO vote

SUO WG members,

Jim Schoening is willfully and outrageously ignoring the directive of the Board of Governors.  He says that he never invalidated the SUMO vote - that is not his choice, the BoG stated clearly and specifically that the SUMO vote failed.  Jim cannot change the BoG decision and his appeal does not suspend the BoG decision.

From the IEEE Standards Association Board of Governors ( the highest decision making body of the IEEE Standards Association).
The IEEE-SA BOG considered the inquiries of the IEEE 1600.1 working group and the opinion of 7 November 2001 offered by Dorsey and Whitney and concurs with and reaffirms the opinion stated.
From the Dorsey and Whitney opinion that the IEEE-SA BoG  "concurs with and reaffirms"
Specifically, we understand that 42 e-mail ballots were received including 9 abstentions, 17 affirmative votes and 16 negative votes. Mr. Smith advised Messrs. Spillers and Schoening that the motion failed because the affirmative votes did not constitute a majority (i.e., 22) of the total number of the ballots cast.
...

Recently, I participated with you in a telephone conference which included Mr. Smith, Eric Herz (Director Emeritus of IEEE and past Parliamentarian of IEEE), Thomas Wettach (partner in the firm of Cohen & Grisbey, which act as special counsel to the IEEE Standards Association), Marco Migliaro (2001 President, IEEE Standards Association) and other members of the IEEE Standards Activities staff. In reviewing this matter, the participants in the telephone conference unanimously conclude that the advice given by Mr. Smith to Messrs. Schoening and Spillers was correct.
There can't be any question about this.  Neither can there be any question of the chair's partiality and misconduct.

Bob



Schoening, James R CECOM DCSC4I wrote:
780D366C8FDBD411859D0000F808137101EBADFD@mail5.monmouth.army.mil">
Bob and SUO WG,
 
    The IEEE Standards Association BoG passed a motion directing me to conduct a new vote on the SUMO document, but I appealed it and never invalidated the original SUMO vote.  I believe my actions are in order.  The vote still stands (it passed), but I will grant you the final outcome is anyone's guess. 
 
Jim Schoening
-----Original Message-----
From: Robert Grayson Spillers [mailto:skydog@pacbell.net]
Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2002 4:21 PM
To: Frank Farance
Cc: standard-upper-ontology@ieee.org
Subject: Re: SUO: Request that KER article be amended

Frank,
In your response to Matthew (and to Murray) you state

The paper makes it clear that the both documents are "starter documents"...
The SUMO is not a starter document for the SUO WG.  The IEEE Board of Governors has unanimously ruled that the SUMO vote failed.  The SUMO enjoys no special status within the SUO WG.

Bob