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

RE: Straw Poll for Millenium Medal

Colleagues,  I think Tony has an excellently well-thought-out proposal here.  Jim, I think the ball is in your court !!!
Thanx,  Buzz
Dr. Everett O. (Buzz) Rigsbee
Boeing SSG
PO Box 3707, M/S: 7M-FM
Seattle, WA  98124-2207
Ph:  (425) 865-2443
Fx:  (425) 865-6721
From:  Tony Jeffree []
Sent:  Thursday, August 19, 1999 1:01 AM
To:  Rigsbee, Everett O
Subject:  RE: Straw Poll for Millenium Medal

I have a suggestion ...
Firstly, a question. How many awards do we have a realistic expectation to get for 802 members (Exec or otherwise)? This seems to be central to finding the right path here.
(1)	If (as I detect from Jim) the realistic expectation is that we get one or at most 2 awards, then the correct thing to do IMHO is NOT to identify any individual names at all, but to nominate 802 as a body (the rules as far as I read them allow individuals *or groups* to be nominated).    After all, 802 as a body has quite a story to tell, and has a very large number of people that have made significant contributions to the creation of the LAN industry over a 19 year period. I somehow think that such a nomination might stand a very good chance of succeeding, and would recognize *all* the contributors in 802 over the years. We should do this *regardless* of how many awards we think are achievable.
(2)	If we think that the realistic expectation is that we get a larger number of awards, but still a fairly small number - half a dozen, say, then we should put forward additional nominations for the working groups of 802 that we think are worthy of special mention, in addition to the overall 802 nomination.  Again, there are particular WGs here that have quite a story to tell, and picking out one or two individuals from each of them might be hard.
(3)	If we think that we might get a significant number of awards (10+ say), then in addition to (1) and (2), we should consider nominating a suitable number of individuals whose contribution has been exceptional.  And I agree entirely with Buzz's expressed views on this - if that list ends up only containing past or present Exec members, then it is entirely the WRONG answer; not because those individuals are not deserving (quite the opposite, for the reasons Pat expressed), but because they are not the *only* ones that are deserving, by a very long way.  Similarly, if that list did not cover the spread of significant activities in 802, then it would be the wrong answer. Apart from the one exception of Jim, the current list of nominees seems only to recognize the contribution of 802.3 to the LAN industry.  We all know .3 is terribly important - but there are one or two other areas - MAC Bridging, to name just one that I have a small interest in - that have been central to the s!
uccess of the industry; others, such as wireless, show promise in terms of its future success beyond 2000.  If we reach this point in the process, we must show some balance in the nominations.
So the first and most important question that we need to answer is: How many nominations are we likely to get? The total number is 3000 ... how are they going to be carved up?  Jim, can you give us some help here?  Perhaps you can make soundings in appropriate places.
At 16:26 18/08/99 -0700, Rigsbee, Everett O wrote:
	>Pat,  If such an expectation exists, I have heard nothing about it at all.  That's why I'm blowing the whistle!  We need to follow through with some additional (non-SEC) nominations.  Jim, can I make an official motion on this.  
	>Thanx,  Buzz
	>Dr. Everett O. (Buzz) Rigsbee
	>Boeing SSG
	>PO Box 3707, M/S: 7M-FM
	>Seattle, WA  98124-2207
	>Ph:  (425) 865-2443
	>Fx:  (425) 865-6721
	>Email: <> 
	>From:	THALER,PAT (HP-Roseville,ex1) [] <mailto:[]> 
	>Sent:	Wednesday, August 18, 1999 4:06 PM
	>To: <> 
	>Subject:	RE: Straw Poll for Millenium Medal
	>You know what a conscientious speller I am ;^).  Blame it on Microsoft.  Spell check seems to accept both spellings though the paper references at my finger tips only acknowledge the "nn" spelling.  On a more serious side, I agree that we should up the number of nominations unless the expectation is for Working Group chairs to handle nominating people from their groups.
	>From:	Rigsbee, Everett O [] <mailto:[]> 
	<mailto:[] <mailto:[]> > 
	>Sent:	Wednesday, August 18, 1999 3:40 PM
	>To:	Rigsbee, Everett O;; <;> 
	<; <;> >  Paul Nikolich; THALER,PAT
	>	(HP-Roseville,ex1)
	>Subject:	RE: Straw Poll for Millenium Medal
	>Pat,  I know all too well how much work Geoff and Howard have put in on the 802.3 standards.  I was in no way attempting to demean their very significant contributions.  I'm just suggesting that it is personally distasteful to me to see the Exec Comm  ONLY  nominating members of the SEC, as though, you don't count if you're not a member of this secret club.  I instead view the SEC as necessary(?) set of bureaucrats whose primary purpose is to provide some administrative assistance to the folks who really create these standards.  I certainly cannot tolerate the thought that there is no other (non-SEC) person out there deserving of a Millennium Medal.  I think we should be awarding at least 10 or 12 medals, and I would be very comfortable including Howard and Geoff in that group.  We have any number of outstanding contributors that are NOT ON the SEC (eg. Tony, Mick, Howie J, etc, etc, etc).  Can't we see our way to "Share the Wealth."  I know we're wonderful, but I bet we'd g!
et a different answer if we opened it up to "our constituencies." 
	>PS:  If we are going to give out "Millennium" Medals, we had better at least learn how to spell "millennium."
	>Thanx,  Buzz
	>Dr. Everett O. (Buzz) Rigsbee
	>Boeing SSG
	>PO Box 3707, M/S: 7M-FM
	>Seattle, WA  98124-2207