FW: [802SEC] Ballot periods
Geoff,
When you said "Our P&P have screwed up because they narrowed the
scope of a letter ballot" [so as not to apply to Sponsor Ballot], I
wondered if you meant that we screwed up last year when we changed
the language regarding WG Letter Ballots, including the duration. To
check, I looked up the prior rules, and the situation was identical:
no reference to Sponsor Ballot rules or durations.
I don't have any older rules, but I'll bet a steak dinner that the
LMSC rules have never specified Sponsor Ballot durations since I've
been coming to 802 meetings (i.e., since November 1998).
Roger
At 11:13 AM -0800 03/02/05, Geoff Thompson wrote:
>Roger-
>
>My profound apologies. In my zeal to protect the process I was
>paying insufficient attention to courtesy.
>
>More appropriately...
> 1) It isn't the Balloting's job to determine balloting
>periods, it is clearly ours.
> 2) I don't trust their judgement with respect to the defaults
>they may throw at us on whatever basis they decide (unless they
>quote chapter and verse of their P&P that over ride ours).
>
>RE your statement:
>
>>Under the status quo, I do not agree that we are in danger of
>>ballots being overturned on appeal for following the Balloting
>>Center defaults (29-30 days for a ballot and 9-10 for a recirc).
>>Those defaults are in accordance with LMSC and IEEE-SA rules.
>>
>Our rules currently say: "...for recirculation ballots, ..., the
>response time shall be at least fifteen days."
>
>Our P&P have screwed up because they narrowed the scope of a letter
>ballot to be that of a "Working Group Letter Ballot" instead of
>having a procedure for "letter ballots" and then requiring Working
>Groups (among others) to use it.
>
>Clearly the scope of LMSC is both Sponsor and Working Group Ballots
>(ever since we became "self-sponsored" and broke away from TCCC
>years ago). This shows up in our P&P in clause 1 paragraph 3
>
>
>The P802 Sponsor Executive Committee serves as the Executive
>Committee for both the sponsor ballot groups as well as the
>Standards Development Groups. The standards sponsoring organization
>is designated as the LAN MAN Standards Committee (LMSC) and includes
>the Sponsor Executive Committee, a balloting pool for forming LMSC
>Sponsor balloting groups, and a set of Standards Development Groups.
>
>AND
>
>
>3.1 Function
> The function of the Executive Committee is to oversee the operation
>of the LAN MAN Standards Committee in the following ways:
>
>j) Oversee formation of sponsor ballot groups and sponsor ballot
process.
>
>AND
>
>
>Clause 4
> The LMSC Sponsor Ballots will be administered by the Executive
>Committee in accordance with Section 5 of the IEEE Standards Manual
>and Procedure 7 of these rules.
>
>There is, of course, no such thing as "the IEEE Standards Manual"
anymore.
>The last one was published in 1992 (paper only).
>I do happen to have one, I could bring it to DFW.
>
>The IEEE Standards Manual clearly says its our job, not that of
>Balloting. The IEEE Standards Manual does not mention balloting
>periods except for something about 60 days for mandatory
>coordination.
>
>It says, in part, (5.2) "The Sponsor is responsible for supervising
>the standards project from inception to completion."
>
>In sum, since:
>
>
>1) It is our responsibility
> 2) We don't explicitly call out the periods for Sponsor Letter
Ballots
>
>I believe that the (implicit) rule till we get things fixed is our
>existing letter ballot procedures.
>We gotta fix the obsolete reference to "The IEEE Standards Manual"
>in clause 4.
>
>Again, my apologies.
>
>Geoff
>
>At 09:54 PM 2/4/2003 -0700, Roger B. Marks wrote:
>
>>Geoff,
>>
>>I object to your characterization of my position. I don't see a
>>record of me saying "we should just defer to whatever staff decides
>>to do". What I said is that the 802 rules do not specify a minimum
>>duration for sponsor ballots or sponsor ballot recircs.
>>
>>If we change the rules to specify minimum durations then, of
>>course, we ought to make sure that the Balloting Center runs our
>>ballots accordingly.
>>
>>Under the status quo, I do not agree that we are in danger of
>>ballots being overturned on appeal for following the Balloting
>>Center defaults (29-30 days for a ballot and 9-10 for a recirc).
>>Those defaults are in accordance with LMSC and IEEE-SA rules. [The
>>IEEE-SA doesn't say much about this, although the Standards
>>Companion says "Recirculations normally do not take the time that
>>regular ballots do--most are only about 10 days in length."]
>>
>>I would support an LMSC rules change to require minimum durations
>>on sponsor ballots and recircs. 30 days and 10 days would be my
>>preference.
>>
>>Roger
>>
>>
>>At 4:06 PM -0800 03/02/04, Geoff Thompson wrote:
>>
>>>Bob-
>>>
>>>I believe that we screwed up on this one. I thoroughly support
>>>your effort. The SA staff is in no better shape than we are in
>>>this area and remember that, in spite of VERY long standing
>>>practice we had NO FOUNDATION WHATSOEVER in our OR/P&P for any
>>>recirc to less than 30 days for the majority of the last 20 years.
>>>
>>>It is my position that Roger was incorrect when he said that we
>>>should just defer to whatever staff decides to do. This is an area
>>>where we could lose an appeal. I believe that the SA should be
>>>providing balloting services to Sponsors under Sponsor rules.
>>>Sponsors, in turn, are supposed to get their P&P approved by
>>>AudCom. It is not a rigorous system. Paul ultimately is on the
>>>hook for the decision.
>>>
>>>I would like to take him off the hook...
>>> ...assure that there is adequate time for review
>>> ...and remove any uncertainty regarding our system.
>>>
>>>My position will be that, with an underlying rationale to see that
>>>the ballot is in hand for at least 10 days, our rules need to say
>>>that all 802 ballot (i.e. Working Group and LMSC) recirculations
>>>will be at least 15 days from the timestamp of the announcing
>>>e-mail until the close of ballot.
>>>
>>>Thanks for grabbing the ball on this.
>>>
>>>Geoff
>>>
>>>At 12:41 PM 1/24/2003 -0800, Grow, Bob wrote:
>>>
>>>>Colleagues:
>>>>
>>>>This is to inform you that I intend to propose a rules change to
>>>>enforce minimum ballot periods for our Sponsor ballots. I also
>>>>intend to raise the issue of ballot periods to ProCom for all SA
>>>>ballots. It is now clear to me that the ballot center does not
>>>>enforce any particular ballot period. (I also can't find any
>>>>rules/P&P that requires them to enforce any arbitrary minimum.)
>>>>I believe the ballot center operates to a default -- the ballot
>>>>being open for some period of time on 10 dates in the US eastern
>>>>time zone (probably restricted by the announcement being sent
>>>>during their working hours). In an exchange trying to determine
>>>>how the ballot center counted "days", I postulate what I thought
>>>>was a theoretical question asking if the period would be have to
>>>>be 10 days (i.e., 10 * 24 hours) or only 10 calendar dates. At
>>>>the time the question was posed, I thought the ballot center was
>>>>enforcing a minimum ballot period what I got in response was an
>>>>offer for a SB recirculation period a day shorter (i.e., 8.xxx
>>>>days).
>>>>
>>>>I just received a particularly onerous example of what is being
>>>>allowed by the ballot center. I received the announcement
>>>>slightly before noon Pacific Time. The ballot closes on February
>>>>2 at 11:59 pm EST.
>>>>
>>>>So, for me, I have 9.375 days to respond (and four of those days
>>>>are on a weekend). For many international participants, they
>>>>realistically will have much less time with this ballot (many
>>>>won't see the announcement until their Monday morning). If one
>>>>or two of you would like to review my proposed rules change text
>>>>prior to distribution to the SEC I would appreciate a response.
>>>>
>>>>Bob Grow
>>>>Chair, IEEE 802.3 Working Group
>>>>bob.grow@ieee.org