Re: [802SEC] +++ LMSC P&P Revision Ballot +++ AudCom
Mat,
I vote Disapprove, with comments below. I'd like to acknowledge
Phillip Barber, an 802.16 member who worked with me on these comments.
I also support most of the disapprove comments I've seen from other
EC members.
Roger
Comment 1:
The proposed 7.1.2.1 would be an extremely radical change to EC
operation. Such a change is totally unwarranted and is not in any way
motivated by the relevant rationale presented along with the ballot:
"A clarification of the responsibilities of the Chair."
In particular, the existing P&P defines the EC as a procedural body,
not a technical body. For example, 7.1.1(e) gives the EC the
authority to "Examine and approve Working Group draft standards for
proper submission to Sponsor ballot group...; not for technical
content."
The proposed 7.1.2.1(a)(b)(c) would put all procedural issues in the
hands of the EC Chair. What, if anything, does this leave to the EC?
Given that the function of the EC is to administer the process,
procedural decisions belong to the EC. It is inappropriate to
delegate them to the Chair. It is the right and duty of the EC as a
whole to make all such decisions, though they as a group may elect to
delegate that right on individual matters.
Finally, the LMSC Chair puts these matters to the LMSC EC members for
vote, not to the WG Members.
Remedy 1:
Modify the proposed changes as:
7.1.2.1 LMSC Chair
The LMSC Chair has the following responsibilities:
a) Decide which matters are procedural and technical
b) Decide procedural matters
ca) Place technical issuesmatters to a vote by WGLMSC EC membership.
db) Lead the participants according to all of the relevant policies
and procedures
ec) Entertain motions, but not make motions
fd) Delegate necessary functions as needed
ge) Set goals and deadlines and strive to adhere to them
hf) Prioritize objectives to best serve the group and the goalsentire
LMSC membership
ig) Seek consensus of the Sponsor if required as a means of resolving
issues
Comment 2:
The ballot rationale explains that one reason for the ballot is to
address an AudCom concern regarding the need for " A better
description of the rights of the participants and due process."
2)
This This AudCom requirement has not been met, or even addressed, by
the proposed revisions. ANSI due process requirements apply to all
those "with a direct and material interest", regardless of
membership. I believe that AudCom is telling us to recognize those
rights.
Remedy 2:
Add the following text at the end of 7.2.3.4:
In addition, all participants, regardless of membership, shall be
entitled to due process and have the rights to:
(a) express a position and its basis
(b) have that position be considered
(c) appeal (7.1.6)
(d) access information on the activities of the LMSC and its
subgroups in a timely manner
(e) bring matters to the attention of the group for consideration
No action of the LMSC or of its officers shall abridge these rights.
Comment 3:
The ballot rationale relates to the rights of the participants and to
the functions of the WG Chair. These issues intersect in 7.2.4.1,
which specifies the Chair's function, giving the Chair extraordinary
powers to rule matters as procedural and to decide procedural issues.
To protect the rights of the members, the P&P should offer some
specifications regarding the distinction between technical and
procedural issues.
Remedy 3:
In subclause 7.2.4.1 , modify the text as follow:
7.2.4.1 Chair’s Function
The Chair of the Working Group decides procedural issues. The Working
Group members and the Chair decide technical issues by vote. The
Working Group Chair generally decides what is procedural and what is
technical. However, any matter regarding the establishment or
modification of a PAR or that would make a non-editorial change to a
draft standard shall be a technical issue.
Comment 4:
The ballot rationale refers to "the lack of requirement to act in
accordance with the IEEE Code of Ethics. This requirement for conduct
should be added to the P&P." The proposed revision does not directly
address this issue. It references the Code of Ethics only by adding
material to 8.4; since 8.4 addresses sessions, the change would
apparenty apply only to sessions. Furthermore, the proposed 8.4
doesn't address the Code of Ethics at all; it simply says that
participants will allow other participants "a fair and equal
opportunity to contribute." This completely misses the point of the
IEEE Code of Ethics.
Remedy 4:
Eliminate the text "in accordance with the IEEE Code of Ethics" from
the proposed addition of 8.4.
Add a subclause 6.5:
6.5 IEEE Code of Ethics
All participants in the LMSC and its subgroups, regardless of
membership status, shall act in accordance with the IEEE Code of Ethics.
Comment 5:
It is not within the power of the WG Chair to ensure that deadlines
are met.
Remedy 5:
Modify the proposed changes as:
7.2.2.1 LMSC Chair
g) Set goals and deadlines and strive to adhere to them
----------
This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector. This list is maintained by Listserv.