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

Re: [802SEC] +++ SEC Rules Change Letter Ballot +++ Ballot on WG electronic voting




Mike, for SEC email ballots the eligible voters all have a very significant
commitment to remain engaged and participate in the process.  Therefore, the
SEC electronic balloting rules call for motions to pass with >50% of ALL
ELIGIBLE VOTERS.  As a consequence, not voting on an SEC electronic ballot
is equivalent to casting a NO vote.

Since the ballot group for any of the Working Groups is so much larger, even
getting 50% of the voters to respond is an effort.  It would be a useless
exercise to require Working Group e-mail ballots to have greater than 50% of
the voting members cast a YES vote.

Best regards,

Robert D. Love
Chair, Resilient Packet Ring Alliance
President, LAN Connect Consultants
7105 Leveret Circle     Raleigh, NC 27615
Phone: 919 848-6773       Mobile: 919 810-7816
email: rdlove@ieee.org          Fax: 208 978-1187
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Takefman" <tak@cisco.com>
To: <p.nikolich@ieee.org>
Cc: "'Robert D. Love'" <rdlove@nc.rr.com>; "'IEEE802'"
<stds-802-sec@ieee.org>
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 4:39 PM
Subject: Re: [802SEC] +++ SEC Rules Change Letter Ballot +++ Ballot on WG
electronic voting


>
> Paul,
>
> This makes sense and is what I was assuming.
>
> The confusing point was that your email indicated that
> for the current SEC motion a failure to vote was counted as a NO.
> I took a quick look at the rules and it is not clear to me why a
> fail to vote on an SEC motion is a no vote. Rather the rule 3.4.2.1
> appears to state that a majority of the voting SEC members must reply.
>
> mike
>
> Paul Nikolich wrote:
> >
> > Mike,
> >
> > The quorom for an electonic ballot is that 50% of the working group
voting
> > members must respond YES, NO or ABSTAIN.  This is exactly the same as a
> > quorum for any WG meeting that is not held during a plenary session.
> >
> > --Paul
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Robert D. Love [mailto:rdlove@nc.rr.com]
> > Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 3:49 PM
> > To: Mike Takefman; p.nikolich@ieee.org
> > Cc: 'IEEE802'
> > Subject: Re: [802SEC] +++ SEC Rules Change Letter Ballot +++ Ballot on
> > WG electronic voting
> >
> > Mike, I believe 50% of the eligible voters voting YES, NO, or ABSTAIN,
is a
> > quorum for electronic balloting.  See the 802.5 Working Group electronic
> > balloting rules I posted on the 802.17 reflector which explicitly
specify
> > that.
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> > Robert D. Love
> > Chair, Resilient Packet Ring Alliance
> > President, LAN Connect Consultants
> > 7105 Leveret Circle     Raleigh, NC 27615
> > Phone: 919 848-6773       Mobile: 919 810-7816
> > email: rdlove@ieee.org          Fax: 208 978-1187
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Mike Takefman" <tak@cisco.com>
> > To: <p.nikolich@ieee.org>
> > Cc: "'IEEE802'" <stds-802-sec@ieee.org>
> > Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 2:29 PM
> > Subject: Re: [802SEC] +++ SEC Rules Change Letter Ballot +++ Ballot on
WG
> > electronic voting
> >
> > >
> > > Paul,
> > >
> > > a question from one of my people. What consitutes a quorum for an
> > > electronic vote (either motion or ballot).
> > >
> > > For example, this SEC rules change ballot marks a failure to vote
> > > as a vote against. Hence, one could argue there is no quorum
requirement
> > > as all voters end up with either a no or whatever they actually
responded
> > > with and 100% of the voters are counted.
> > >
> > > Another interpretation is similar to those of a meeting. Specifically
> > > the number of people who respond to the ballot as a yes or no or
abstain
> > > must be greater than 50% of the voting members.
> > >
> > > thanks,
> > >
> > > mike
> > >
> > > Paul Nikolich wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Dear SEC members,
> > > >
> > > > Attached you will find the text for the SEC rules change letter
ballot
> > on WG
> > > > Electronic Voting.
> > > >
> > > > Scope:  To permit voting by electronic means at the working group
level.
> > > >
> > > > Purpose: To facilitate the WG consensus process.
> > > >
> > > > The ballot opens March 18, 2002 and closes June 8, 2002 12 midnight
EDT
> > > > (remember if you do not vote or abstain it is equivalent to a
DISAPPROVE
> > > > vote).  Buzz, please ensure this gets sent to the 802-wide email
list as
> > > > well.  WG chairs, please invite your WG members to comment through
you.
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > >
> > > > --Paul Nikolich
> > > >
> > > > Chair, IEEE802 LAN/MAN Standards Project
> > > > email: p.nikolich@ieee.org
> > > > cell:    857.205.0050
> > > > mail:   18 Bishops Lane, Lynnfield, MA 01940
> > > >
> > >
>
  --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > --------------------------
> > > >                                                           Name:
MAR2002
> > rules change on wg electronic balloting.pdf
> > > >    MAR2002 rules change on wg electronic balloting.pdf    Type:
Acrobat
> > (application/pdf)
> > > >                                                       Encoding:
base64
> > >
> > > --
> > > Michael Takefman              tak@cisco.com
> > > Manager of Engineering,       Cisco Systems
> > > Chair IEEE 802.17 Stds WG
> > > 2000 Innovation Dr, Ottawa, Canada, K2K 3E8
> > > voice: 613-254-3399       fax: 613-254-4867
>
> --
> Michael Takefman              tak@cisco.com
> Manager of Engineering,       Cisco Systems
> Chair IEEE 802.17 Stds WG
> 2000 Innovation Dr, Ottawa, Canada, K2K 3E8
> voice: 613-254-3399       fax: 613-254-4867