From: Jerry1upton@aol.com
Sent: Friday, February 10, 2006 7:41 AM
To: Puthenkulam, Jose P; p.nikolich@ieee.org
Cc: Yaghoobi, Hassan; jerry.upton@ieee.org
Subject: Re: FW: [802-20-GENERAL:] 802.20 Letter Ballot 1

Dear Jose,
The author of any document is the best person to understand the intent. Therefore I completely disagree with your viewpoint.
Also  the 802.20 P&P states the chair decides procedural issues.
My position will not change on this point. 
Sincerely,
Jerry Upton
Chair 802.20

In a message dated 2/10/2006 9:23:34 AM Central Standard Time, jose.p.puthenkulam@intel.com writes:
  Dear Jerry,

  Formal WG Documents when written are not for any one persons interpretation, but for the entire WG. So we need to respect that.

  The same applies to the standards we create, if the text contributor had a different intent than the general reader of the standard, then whatever is in the standard is what holds, not the contributors intent.

  Also, any straight reading of rules will confirm our interpretation of it. 

  Hope this clarifies our position,

  thanks & best regards,
  jose





----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    From: Jerry1upton@aol.com [mailto:Jerry1upton@aol.com] 
    Sent: Friday, February 10, 2006 1:20 AM
    To: Puthenkulam, Jose P; p.nikolich@ieee.org
    Cc: Yaghoobi, Hassan; jerry.upton@ieee.org
    Subject: Re: FW: [802-20-GENERAL:] 802.20 Letter Ballot 1


    Dear Paul,
    The below is my reply to the previous complaint email.
    "Dear Hassan,
    The section of the 802.20 P&P you reference in your compliant, section 2.9.2 is additional requirements imposed within 802.20 on Task Groups. Currently 802.20 has no Task Groups (TGs). At the Working Group level the rules are the same as the 802 P&P. I am very sure of this interpretation as I wrote the current 802.20 P&P. 

    I hope this clarifies your concerns.

    The Letter Ballot is valid and I encourage members to complete and submit their ballots before the upcoming deadline.
    Regards,
    Jerry Upton"

    It is unfortunate that Jose and Hassan are not correctly reading the 802.20 P&P. As I said before I am very clear on the intent as I wrote the document.
    Regards,
    Jerry Upton


    In a message dated 2/9/2006 6:45:40 PM Central Standard Time, jose.p.puthenkulam@intel.com writes:
      Dear Paul,

      We have a complaint on the initiation of 802.20 WG letter ballot. I'm attaching the letter explaining this matter. As per the LMSC P&P section highlighted below, we would like to get the support of Jerry to resolve this matter as much as possible informally within the WG.

      LMSC P&P:

      7.1.6 Appeal and complaint process
      A significant attempt should be made to resolve concerns informally, since it is recognized that a formal appeals process has a tendency to negatively, and sometimes permanently, affect the goodwill and cooperative relationships between and among persons. If the informal attempts to resolve a concern are unsuccessful and a formal complaint is filed, the following formal procedure shall be invoked.

      In the absence of a favorable resolution within the WG, we will unfortunately have to file an appeal.

      thanks & best regards,

      jose

      Jose Puthenkulam
      Intel Corporation
      jose.p.puthenkulam@intel.com 
      _______________________________

      From: Yaghoobi, Hassan [mailto:hassan.yaghoobi@INTEL.COM]
      Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 5:15 PM
      To: STDS-802-MOBILITY@listserv.ieee.org
      Subject: Re: [802-20-GENERAL:] 802.20 Letter Ballot 1

      Dear Jerry,
      We have complaint on initiation of this letter ballot. Please see the attached document. We request your prompt response and action on this matter.

      Sincerely,

      Hassan Yaghoobi

      Intel Corporation
      ________________________________

      From: Jerry1upton@AOL.COM [mailto:Jerry1upton@AOL.COM]
      Sent: Friday, January 27, 2006 12:55 PM
      To: STDS-802-MOBILITY@listserv.ieee.org
      Subject: [802-20-GENERAL:] 802.20 Letter Ballot 1


      All,
      The below are the Instructions for the 802.20 Letter Ballot 1.
      All Voting Members have been sent an email with the access codes for the Members Only area of the web site. If you are voting member and did not receive a separate email please contact me. The voters for this ballot are the voters of record as posted for the January Interim session.
      The ballot is a 40 day ballot that closes March 8, 2006.
      Regards,
      Jerry Upton
      Chair, IEEE 802.20
      jerry.upton@ieee.org

      802.20 Letter Ballot 1 Instructions
      These instructions apply only for the 802.20 letter ballot 1 (LB1) on Draft 1.0 of the 802.20 Standard.
      Important:  Follow the instructions. Failure to follow the instructions may result in your vote being discarded as an invalid vote due to an error or at the discretion of the WG Chairman. Letter ballots are an enormous amount of work for the leadership of the group. The only way to have this ballot processed accurately and in a timely manor is for voting members to cooperate and following the instructions.

      The list of voters for this ballot is the same as the posted list of voters for the January 2006 Interim.

      The ballot opens January 27, 2006 at 2359 Eastern Time and closes 40 days later on March 8, 2006 at 2359 Eastern Time.

      Motion:  Move to forward Draft 1.0 of IEEE 802.20 to Sponsor Ballot.

      To Vote:  YOU MUST Insert in the Subject field of the return email:
      Vote-LB1-last name-first name-(yes, no or abstain)

      (for example:  Vote-LB1-Shannon-Claude-abstain)

      ADDRESS YOUR EMAIL to: jerry.upton@ieee.org <res://C:\PROGRA~1\AMERIC~1.0\resource.dll/jerry.upton@ieee.org>

                                  with a CC to  jerry.upton@gmail.com <mailto:jerry.upton@gmail.com>

                                                          klerer@flarion.com
      Obtaining the draft:  Draft 1.0 of IEEE 802.20 is available at http://www.ieee802.org/20/private/P802.20-D1.0.pdf

      The draft is password protected.  To obtain the draft, use the username and the password supplied to voting members for the private area.

      Submitting Comments:
      To submit comments, the following instructions must be followed:

      0)     Form:  The official ballot and comment form for Letter Ballot 79 must be used.  This comment form is available at http://www.ieee802.org/20/private/LB1_BallotCommentForm.xls.

      1)     Names: In the header of comment response form, please fill in your name in the <First Name>, <Last Name> fields.  Do not use your initials or anything else.

      2)     Clause Column: This is the section number of the draft that your comment applies to - e.g. 2.1 or 4.2.3.  If you have a comment that applies to the entire document put "General" in the section field. Don’t put “all”, “many”, “various” or any other word you may personally fancy. If the field contains anything other that a clause number or “General”, the comment will be discarded and your vote possibly invalidated.  If your comment relates to a table, place the clause in which the table resides in this column and not the table number.  Put only the clause number and not the words, e.g. “clause”.

      3)     E/T Column: Please use an E or T only to indicate a technical or an editorial comment. Please use upper case only so things sort right when we get all done.  Incorrectly categorized comments will be re-categorized by the Working Group Chair.

      4)     "Part of No vote” Column: If you say "no" in this column, we will feel free to skip that comment in terms of formally satisfying a "NO" vote. For any comment that is not part of your “NO” vote, mark it as "not part of a no vote" by entering “no” in the column. Any voter that votes “NO” should have at least one comment marked “yes” as part support for their “NO” vote.  Any voter that votes “YES” should not have any comments marked “yes” in this column.


      5)     "comment/explanation" and "recommended change" columns: These are pretty self explanatory. If you do not recommend a change the comment may be skipped as you have not asked the group to do anything. Please keep the explanation of the comment separate from what you want done as a result of your reasoning. The voting group is too large for the  group to be interpreting what you are requesting.   Please remember that the operating rules state that all “No” votes MUST be accompanied by comments which include specific reasons and enough information for the group to understand what you desire in order to change your “no” to a “yes”. Simply saying “not good enough” is insufficient as the task group cannot reasonably be expected to understand what would satisfy the commenter and so invalidation of the vote is justifiable.

      6)     Draft line numbers: If you choose to include a page / line number reference in your comments, please do so by putting is as text at the start of your comment. Do NOT put this info in the section number field. The rational is that the page/line numbers are valid only for the balloted draft version.  The section numbers are more likely to still be correct in later versions.

      Jerry Upton, 802.20 WG Chair

      E-mail: jerry.upton@ieee.org


      Mark Klerer, Editor

      E-mail: klerer@flarion.com

      January 27, 2006