Re: quorum
Scott,
If people who are officially eligible to vote miss two consecutive
votes, they are taken off the roll. (A vote will typically be
by email and run for three weeks, giving ample time for people
who have been on holiday, as I have just been :-) ) This limits
logjams.
If people are sufficiently interested to re-register (by
contacting the chair or acting chair, who will change their
status back), then I am guessing they will be sufficiently
interested to participate in additional votes.
I view it as important to have all participate, to maximize the
possibility of universal acceptance of the final product. Let's
see how the present system goes. We can correct problems as
they arise, with position papers, etc.
Best regards,
Baker
P.S. The actual mechanics of the process (at least at present) are:
1. The vote tabulator informs the acting chair of inactive
members.
2. The acting chair changes the status.
3. On subsequent votes, the acting chair sends the vote tabulator
a roster, including status of each member.
4. The vote tabulator informs people who attempt to vote
of their status, if they have not registered or if
they are ineligible due to missing previous votes.
5. The voter either registers or contacts the acting chair
with an explanation of the reasons for the missed votes, as appropriate.
In the latter case, the acting chair, possibly in consultation
with the other officers, reinstates the previously truant
voter upon his (and the other officers') discretion.
Scott Ferson wrote:
The P&P defines a quorum of 50%. I suggest that a smaller quorum is
more practicable. George Corliss tells me this is not a moot point, and
actually might be of concern given that the P&P passed by only two votes
despite his repeated calls to vote.
A majority of all people eligible to vote is an awfully large quorum for
a globally dispersed professional organization. Wikipedia says "In an
ordinary society (such as a local club) that follows Robert's Rules of
Order, if the quorum is not specified in the organization's bylaws , it
is a majority of the members. This can cause problems because, in most
such organizations, only a smaller portion of the membership usually
comes to meetings, and without a quorum, no business may be done. It may
be impossible to correct this problem within the bounds of parliamentary
procedure. For this reason, it is a good idea to include a provision in
the bylaws setting the quorum at some smaller number."
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quorum)
Cheers,
Scott
> Maybe the point is moot now that the P&P has been adopted. If it's not
> moot, perhaps you could advise me about the email address which is the
> "entire IEEE 1788 alias". I've been seeing several addresses, and I'm
> just not sure where I should point.
Not moot. Yours and some other concerns have come up that should be
discussed and perhaps amendments proposed.
<stds-1788@xxxxxxxx>
> Dumping inattentive people from the rolls is one solution as you note,
> but that's got obvious deficiencies. (How can I re-enter the fold once
> I'm dumped?)
P&P says that you just re-register with IEEE.
This IS an issue. The P&P passed by only 2 votes, in spite of my repeated
nags. However, the intent of IEEE is that there is no standard unless there
is sufficient enthusiasm and consensus within the proposing community.
George
--
---------------------------------------------------------------
R. Baker Kearfott, rbk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx (337) 482-5346 (fax)
(337) 482-5270 (work) (337) 993-1827 (home)
URL: http://interval.louisiana.edu/kearfott.html
Department of Mathematics, University of Louisiana at Lafayette
(Room 217 Maxim D. Doucet Hall, 1403 Johnston Street)
Box 4-1010, Lafayette, LA 70504-1010, USA
---------------------------------------------------------------