IEEE 802.16 Letter Ballot #5: Voting Report

Opening date: 12 April 2002
Closing date: 17 May 2002 (anywhere in the world)

Summary

Ballot Details (Final)

Name\Family	Name\Given	Vote
Agrawal	Aditya	Approve
An	Song	-
Antonello	Gordon	Approve
Arefi	Reza	Approve
Ariyavisitakul	S. Lek	Approve
Arrakoski	Jori	Approve
Audeh	Malik	Approve
Avivi	Eli	Approve
Baugh	C.R. (Rick)	Approve
Belec	Yvon	Approve
Benyamin- Seeyar	Anader	Approve
Bushue	Carl	Approve
Buskila	Baruch	Approve
Caso	Gregory	-
Chang	Yuankai	Approve
Chang	Dean	Approve
Chauncey	David	Approve
Chayat	Naftali	Approve
Chayer	Rémi	Approve
Chung	KiHo	-
Edmonston	Brian	Approve
Eidson	Brian	Approve
Eilts	Henry	Approve
Eklund	Carl	Approve
Erceg	Vinko	Approve
Foster	Robert	-
Freedman	Avraham	Disapprove
Garrett	Andrew	Approve
Garrison	G. Jack	Approve
Gieschen	Brian	Approve
Goldhammer	Marianna	Approve
Hadad	Zion	Disapprove
Hakim	Joseph	Approve
Harteneck	Moritz	Approve
Hebron	Yoav	Approve
Hunter	Wayne	Approve
Husson	David	Approve
Jackson	Du Wayne	Approve
Jacobsen	Eric	-
Jamali	Hamadi	Approve
Joo	Panyuh	Approve
Jorgensen	Jacob	Approve
Kaitz	Tal	Approve
Kasslin	Mika	Approve
Kelly	Phil	Approve
Kelman	Ofer	Approve
Kiernan	Brian	Approve
Kitroser	Itzik	Disapprove
Klein	Jay	-
Kolze	Thomas	Disapprove
Krinock	Jerome	Approve
Krishnamoorthy	Rajeev	Approve
Kwak	Joseph	-
Labs	Jonathan	Approve
Langley	John	-
Lee	Chin-Chen	Approve
Leiba	Yigal	Abstain
Leng	Minfei	Abstain
Levinson	Moshe	-
Lewis	Barry	Approve
Li	Xiaodong	Approve
Li	Lingjie	Approve
Liebetreu	John	Approve
Lindh	Lars	Approve
Lou	Hui-Ling	Approve
Lycklama	Heinz	Approve
Malkemes	Robert	-
Markarian	Garik	Approve
Marks	Roger	Approve
McKown	Russell	Approve
Mehta	Sushil	-
Meyer	Ronald	Approve
Middleton	Andrew	Approve
Mody	Apurva	Approve
Murias	Ronald	Approve
Music	Wayne	-
Nadeau	Jim	-
Nelson	Robert	Approve
Olszewski	Kim	Approve
Padan	Uzi	Approve
Paff	Mike	Approve
Patel	Manish	Approve
Peirce	Kenneth	Approve
Ponnuswamy	Subbu	Approve
Quilez	Vicente	-
Rafie	Manouchehr	-
Ran	Moshe	Approve
Regev	Einan	-
Reible	Stanley	Disapprove
Robinson	Gene	Abstain
Roehr	Walt	Approve
Rogers	Shane	Approve
Sarajedini	Amir	Approve
Sarca	Octavian	Approve
Sari	Hikmet	-
Satapathy	Durga	Approve
Scarpa	Carl	Approve
Schwartz	Randall	Approve
Segal	Yossi	Approve
Selea	Radu	Approve
Seller	Olivier	-
Shani	David	-
Shenhav	Chaim	-
Shirali	Chet	-
Simkins	James	Approve
Singh	Manoneet	Approve
Son	Jung Je	-
Sonander	Sean	Approve
Stanwood	Kenneth	Approve
Stewart	Michael	Abstain
Struhsaker	Paul	Approve
Sydor	John	Approve
Taylor	Shawn	Approve
Tellado	Jose	Approve
Tiram-Regev	Ayelet	-
Trinkwon	David	Approve
van Waes	Nico	Approve
Varma	Subir	Approve
Wang	Arthur	Approve
Wang	Lei	Approve
Wang	Stanley	Approve
Watkins	Larry	-
Whitehead	Philip	Approve
Whiting	Robert	-
Wise	Curt	Approve
Yanover	Vladimir	Approve
Ye	Huanchun	Approve
Yu	Heejung	Abstain
Zhang	Wenhan	Approve
Zyskowski	Paul	Approve

Comments from Disapprove Voters:

Hadad, Zion

I disapprove the voting due to the fact the major voting are corrently held on Fridays altought we have requested in the past to change the major voting to Thursdays (like it was in the Finland meeting). I think that the voting should be done on Fridays for fairness reasons if major voting days will be limited to Monday to Thursday I will vote approve.

Kitroser, Itzik

See comment from Zion Hadad.

Freedman, Avi

I am sorry I cannot make it to Calgary. Although I am not able to be there, I voted "approve" for the LB5, as I feel it is important to advance the standard, and I trust the people who are there to work in the best way towards that goal. However, I sympethise with Zion's comment to the letter ballot, which was also expressed by Naftali in response to the SEC rule changes. Having major decisions taken on the closing plenary on Friday, when most of those living outside north America have to leave, makes the quorum even smaller than it is. I would rather see the closing plenary Thursday night. For all its worth, if the schedule is kept as it is, I would like to change my vote on LB5 to "Disapprove".

Kolze, Thomas

I simply disagree with the principle that a minority of the Working Group, acting on short notice, draft a new document in one meeting and initiate a WG Letter Ballot for that draft. I don't see the wisdom in this nor the need for the haste. I am particularly in disagreement with this approach given that this came up on such short notice --- it was not planned or scheduled far in advance, like much of our WG activities have been. I, for one, want to attend the meeting but simply cannot. This meeting is far more important now than it seemed going into March. I would still respectfully disagree with this approach, however, even if it had been planned a year in advance. I don't see the need to empower a minority of the WG to draft a document and initiate a letter ballot in a few weeks' time.

Reible, Stanley

To fellow members: If the motion was more specific in its allowances or scope, I might be able to vote for it. In general, proposals of this type do violate both the intent and the letter of Robert's Rules.

Comments from Approve Voters:

Comments from Abstain Voters: