SUO: RE: Further guidance from SAB
Frank,
My motion was that we have another vote, if and when Jim's current, final
appeal is
concluded and the BoG continues to uphold their decision.
My motion, and Murray's second, are not in conflict with your statement that
we cannot take any votes until the appeals have settled. Yet this will
hopefully ensure that we do take another vote if necessary.
I agree with you, and also noted in making my motion, that all votes are
affected by this matter, since it relates to how votes are counted.
Phil Jackson
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-standard-upper-ontology@majordomo.ieee.org
> [mailto:owner-standard-upper-ontology@majordomo.ieee.org]On Behalf Of
> Frank Farance
> Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2002 9:27 AM
> To: standard-upper-ontology@ieee.org
> Subject: SUO: Further guidance from SAB
>
>
>
> At 08:13 2002-02-24 -0600, murray j bent wrote:
> >
> > cc: standard-upper-ontology@ieee.org
> >
> > I second Phil's motion that a vote is taken on SUMO ASAP
>
> Because of conflicting rules/guidance, unfortunately, we can't
> take *any* votes until the appeals have settled, etc.. In short,
> the SUMO vote *was* counted properly, as per the CS SAB P&P rules
> (and as per Robert's and consistent with NYS Law). This is why
> we need to wait to find out how this will all be settled.
>
> -FF
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Frank Farance, Farance Inc. T: +1 212 486 4700 F: +1 212 759 1605
> mailto:frank@farance.com http://farance.com
> Standards, products, services for the Global Information Infrastructure
>