|Thread Links||Date Links|
|Thread Prev||Thread Next||Thread Index||Date Prev||Date Next||Date Index|
This is actually covered better in 6.3 Session Fees, where it says
"Everyone who attends a Session, except for those for whom the fee has
been waived, shall pay the Session fee."
I suggest we delete it from 4.2 Voting Membership.
On 12/1/21 1:03 PM, Jay Holcomb wrote:
> hi James
> one thought maybe, in the 4.2 on voting membership where it mentions about
> Session fees. the 2nd sentence starts with “Those attending……”. i
> know it has been there and is meant to be for anyone attending, though a
> lot of focus in this section is on ‘membership’.
> would saying “Anyone attending Sessions shall pay….” be clearer?
> that is all,
> From: James P. K. Gilb <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> Date: Wed, Dec 1, 2021 at 11:34 AM
> Subject: Re: [802SEC] Proposed IEEE 802 LMSC WG P&P
> To: <STDS-802-SEC@listserv.ieee.org>
>> I have reviewed the potential issue with member vs. non-voting member
>> and voting member.
>> In 4.3, it says N/A for non-voting member, hence WGs only have voting
>> members, there is no other class of member.
>> I could add a clarification to 4.2, by adding "All Working Group Members
>> are voting members."
>> 4.2 Voting Membership
>> Working Group membership is by individual. All Working Group Members are
>> voting members. Those attending Sessions shall pay any required Session
>> fees if established. Participants seeking Working Group membership are
>> responsible for fulfilling the requirements to gain and maintain
>> Now, if a WG wants different sub-classes of participants (e.g.,
>> aspirant) or voting member (e.g., member in doom or member in peril),
>> then they can do that in their Operations Manual.
>> So, I am suggesting the above change, plus the editorial changes on
>> slide 10 of ec-21-0287-02, leave in "Although not a requirement for
>> membership in the Working Group, participants are encouraged to join the
>> IEEE, IEEE SA and the IEEE Computer Society."
>> In 4.6 Working Group Participant list:
>> Change "except temporarily when required to edit or update the list."
>> To be:
>> "except temporarily during the time required to use, edit or update the
>> as we discussed in the closing meeting.
>> I am going to update the proposed document and start an early close
>> ballot tonight (as authorized during our closing meeting).
>> James Gilb
>> On 11/17/21 7:59 PM, ROBERT GROW wrote:
>>> Since you have designated me as your spelling and grammar checker, I
>> have a few non-substantive comments of that sort. BUT, I also have other
>> comments that might cause EC members to conclude the WG P&P is not ready
>> for submittal again.
>>> General — There are a lot of brackets which makes inclusion of the text
>> ambiguous. The instructions say to either remove the bracketed text
>> (assume including the brackets), or remove the brackets if used, this
>> hasn’t been done.
>>> Page 6, 1.5 — "An Interim Session is set of meetings...” grammar
>> correction to "An Interim Session is a set of meetings…"
>>> Page 7, 1.5 — "A Session is collection of …” grammar correction to "A
>> Session is a collection of …”
>>> Page 11, 3.2.5,a) — Readability would be improved if the run-on sentence
>> is broken up, but I note the problem is AudCom’s from making the lettered
>> list phrases rather than sentences. The ending "Second Vice Chair does .”
>> left me thinking “does what?”. Perhaps replace “does” with “takes over”
>> for consistency with the First Vice Chair text.
>>> Now for a few substantive issues!
>>> Page 4, 1.5 — There is a baseline problem that complicates the
>> document. All participants must be either a member or non-member, but
>> there is nothing in the baseline that defines any rights or other status
>> except they can’t vote. In the past, IEEE legal has given us the
>> interpretation that a subscriber to a reflector is a participant. I hope
>> this remains true. Unfortunately the Baseline P&P use italics in 1.5 to
>> define non-member, member, voting member, and non-voting member. (This
>> makes the word “member” ambiguous in some cases in both AudCom and our
>> text, and this use of italics differs from other terms that are capitalized
>> (e.g., “Chair”). Uncapitalized (i.e., no italics) is appropriate for “IEEE
>> SA member” and other members that aren’t referring to WG membership, so
>> AudCom use of capitals for the terms would improve the baseline.
>>> I think we would be better off if we could change the 1.5 definition of
>> terms. For us, Members are a subset of Participants, and I don’t know of
>> any reason we want to identify a group which is non-member participants.
>> Similarly, I have trouble with the need for a definition for non-voting
>> members (yes I noted 4.3).
>>> Enough whinging about the baseline. What is wrong with the current
>> baseline WG P&P text and the 1.5 definitions of member being either voting
>> or non-voting:
>>> 3.5.4,h) — So non-member participants can’t get the list of voting
>> members? Why? Why isn’t this the WG membership list of 4.7, shouldn’t all
>> participants be able to know all other participants affiiiations? (Oops
>> this is baseline issue, but still is related to the problem of the 1.5
>> definition separating Members into non-voting members and voting members
>> and perhaps some on AudCom having trouble separating “members” from being a
>> synonym for “voting member".)
>>> 4.2, first paragraph — The first use of “membership” appears to be
>> correct, the others should be “voting membership".
>>> 4.2, third and fourth paragraphs — All occurrences of “membership”
>> should be “voting membership”.
>>> 4.2, 6th paragraph, last sentence — This is misleading. Perhaps add at
>> the end “without payment of a per ballot fee”.
>>> 4.2, 8th paragraph — “Membership” should be "Voting membership”.
>>> 4.2, 9th paragraph — All occurrences of “membership” should be “voting
>>> 4.2.1, 1st paragraph — “Membership” should be "Voting membership”.
>>> 4.2.1, 3rd paragraph — “member (i.e., has voting rights)” should use the
>> defined term voting member
>>> 4.2.1, 5th through 8th paragraphs — all occurrences of “member” or
>> “membership” without the qualifier “voting” should have that qualifier.
>>> 12 — All forms of “member” should be “voting member”
>>> 14, second paragraph — “members” should be “voting members”
>>> 4.6 and 4.7 — I have a practical problem with both the position of
>> Yvette, and the text. I find three lists used in the P&P: WG Voting
>> Member list (3.4.5,h), WG Participant List (4.6), and WG Membership list
>> (4.7). An example of a practical problem is Direct Vote Live. As I
>> understand, it uses email addresses in validating who is allowed to vote,
>> and that has to be populated to use the tool. Email addresses are only
>> included on the WG Participant List, and there is no exemption for using
>> keeping any of the PII contained in the WG Participant List for any purpose
>> except for updating the list. This means that volunteers cannot
>> practically run a tool the uses any of the PII in the WG Participant List.
>> This makes things less secure than using the WG Membership List. But The
>> WG Membership List does not even information to separate voting members and
>> non-voting members per the definitions of 1.5. How does the Secretary
>> fulfill their duty in 3.5.4,h when the Membership List.
>>> It seems to me that this is mostly a baseline problem. Would AudCom
>> allow extraction of voting status of members from the Participant list to
>> create the voting member list? Would AudCom (contrary to the instructions)
>> allow voting status of members to be included as item c)? Would AudCom be
>> willing to change 3.5.4,h) to reference the WG Membership list instead of
>> creating a third list? Would IEEE SA Risk Management recognize the
>> practical need to use a subset of the PII to keep our process with
>> electronic tools both practical and a secure implementation of more
>> cumbersome methods for doing things like roll call voting.
>>>> On Nov 16, 2021, at 11:28 AM, James P. K. Gilb <
>> email@example.com> wrote:
>>>> I have uploaded the proposed WG P&P. It can be found at:
>>>> We had some discussion prior to approving it before about not storing
>> the the Working Group Participant List on non IEEE hardware. The
>> compromise we came up with was:
>>>> "except temporarily when required to edit or update the list."
>>>> The AudCom reviewers pointed out that "temporarily" is ill-defined.
>>>> I have suggested changing it to:
>>>> "except temporarily during the time required to edit or update the
>>>> Yvette has suggested:
>>>> "except temporarily during the time required to edit or update the list
>> if the list is not on a system that automatically stores the data to a
>> non-IEEE system, and the information is deleted immediately after use."
>>>> This topic generated a fair amount of discussion before, so in the
>> interest of keeping our closing meeting shorter, I would invite comments on
>> the text via email. It seems reasonable to assume that there is better
>> wording available.
>>>> As a reminder, there is a new proposed Operations Manual for which I
>> will ask for a vote at the closing. Please review and comment. I have
>> some editorial corrections from Bob Grow (I don't need spell check or
>> grammar check, I have Bob).
>>>> In particular, I changed "IEEE 802 LMSC Interim Teleconference Meeting"
>> to be "IEEE 802 LMSC Interim Electronic Meeting" to match the term in our
>> P&P. I think I have used and capitalized it correctly in the OM. I also
>> capitalized Interim Session and Plenary Session as they are now defined
>> terms in our WG P&P.
>>>> Take a look, you can find the updated proposed version at:
>>>> James Gilb
>>>> This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector.
>> This list is maintained by Listserv.
>> This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector. This
>> list is maintained by Listserv.
To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-SEC list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-SEC&A=1