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

FW: [802SEC] Public Relations Point of Contact

Dear SEC,

Roger Marks has done a great job as the IEEE 802 PR point of contact for
last 3 plenary sessions and he is 'retiring'.  We need someone to pick
the responsibilities that Roger performed as the Public Relations Point
Contact and I am looking for a volunteer.   Roger has listed the duites
performed below.

Pulling together input from the WG/TAG chairs and putting it together
into a
coherent whole via the 802 News Bulletin is a tough job, but it does
people a clear, accurate view of the many projects going on inside IEEE

 I'll need a volunteer within the next week--any takers?

Once again Roger, thanks for your time and effort.

--Paul Nikolich
Chairman, IEEE 802

----- Original Message -----
From: "Roger B. Marks" <>
To: <>
Cc: <>; <>
Sent: Thursday, January 30, 2003 9:49 AM
Subject: PR Point of Contact duties

> Paul,
> As we have discussed, I would like to retire from the 802 "Public
> Relations Point of Contact" duties I assumed a year ago.
> I hope you'll find someone else willing to take this role. The key
> activity is to develop an 802 News Bulletin and have it ready for
> release a week after each 802 Plenary. I think it's a valuable
> exercise.
> To give you an idea of what's required, here is a schedule of
> activities based on that used at the previous Plenary. The dates are
> all with respect to the opening of the Plenary:
> -6 weeks: send out a memo requesting input for the bulletin from the
> WGs based on what they expect to achieve during the Plenary
> -2.5 weeks: deadline for initial input
> -7 days: send draft bulletin, based on assembling initial input and
> editing for style and consistency, to Michael Bratnick
> -5 days: Michael sends an edited draft to Karen McCabe for review
> -3 days: Karen e-mails draft to reviewers, defining the deadline for
> post-Plenary corrections and updates. Comments to go to Karen and
> Michael as well as PR Point of Contact
> +8 days: Corrections and updates due
> +9 days: Submit revised draft to Michael
> +10 days: Draft, edited by Michael, submitted for review
> +11 days: Final bulletin released to press
> The biggest challenge is that many of the Working Groups ignore the
> deadlines and/or submit inappropriate materials. It's been hard to
> get them to follow the format and style of previous bulletins. Also,
> you need to remind people that, during the drafting phase, they are
> being asked to draft a future status report based on a projected
> status, not a report of the status before the Plenary. Other than the
> Chair, there may not be in many people in a Working Group in a
> position to make this kind of projection without help. For this
> reason, there is a temptation to simply forget about pre-Plenary
> drafts. However, I think that they are important because you can
> solve the basic style and format problems in advance. Also, you can,
> in principle at least, ensure that each WG has a specific lists of
> issue to follow up on. You can imagine each WG essentially
> designating a reporter to fact-check a finite list of news items.
> That's a lot less demanding than handing a reporter a blank slate.
> Personally, I also think it's helpful for the WG to come into the
> meeting with a specific set of outcomes communicated.
> Roger