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

RE: Straw Poll for Millenium Medal


I just got off of the phone with Dennis Bodson who is heading up the awards
process within the SA for the Milennium Medal.

The following are the facts as he presented them to me.

1) The SA has 6 medals to award. No more, no less.

2) Each medal is awarded to a single person whose name will be engraved on
the medal. The name of a group will not be engraved on the medal. The name
of more than one person will not be engraved on the medal.

3) The 6 medals are not pre-allocated within the SA, i.e. if the nominees
from 802 each presented in their nomination form a more compelling case for
meeting the criteria then 802 could sweep the awards and take them all.
While this may be the claim it is probably not realistic from a political
point of view.

I told Dennis that his earlier message did not convey the above points with
sufficient clarity and that he should send a follow-up message to clarify
this issue.

I am afraid that this would leave any nomination that we put in under
Tony's proposal as disqualified.

I don't like any of this very much and am seriously considering a
suggestion that the SA not accept ANY Millenium medals in protest that an
allocation of 6 (6/3000 = 0.2%) is completely out of whack with the durable
contributions that IEEE Standards have made to "professional achievements
worthy of recognition for significant impact leading up to and including
the new millennium."

I would be interested in your thoughts.


At 09:00 AM 8/19/99 +0100, Tony Jeffree wrote:
>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
>(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 success 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 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
>>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:  THALER,PAT (HP-Roseville,ex1) []
>>Sent:  Wednesday, August 18, 1999 4:06 PM
>>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 []
>>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 get!
>> 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
| Geoffrey O. Thompson                    |
| Chair IEEE 802.3                        |
| Nortel Networks, Inc.  M/S SC5-02       |
| 4401 Great America Parkway              |
| P. O. Box 58185                         |
| Santa Clara, CA 95052-8185  USA         |
| Phone: +1 408 495 1339                  |
| Fax:   +1 408 988 5525                  |
| E-Mail:  |
| Please see the IEEE 802.3 web page at   |