Re: [802SEC] 802.20 affirmation
All,
I sent this message yesterday and have yet to receive my copy from the
SEC reflector. Therefore, I am sending it again.
Thanks,
wlq
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [802SEC] 802.20 affirmation
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 11:11:55 -0800
From: Bill Quackenbush <billq@attglobal.net>
To: Bob O'Hara <bob@airespace.com>
CC: stds-802-sec@ieee.org
References: <40301581B2962B448690A023EF16DFE15C546D@bsn-mail-01.bstormnetworks.com>
All,
I have been struggling with this issue since it arose. I have come to a
resolution which may or may not be helpful to others.
I first made a search of the LMSC P&P for "affirm", "approv" and
"confirm" looking for all of the text concerning the
aproval/affirmation/confirmation of WG/TAG chairs and vice chairs. I
have found four sections addressing this issue, section 3.1.b, the first
paragraph of section 3.2, section 3.3 and the first and last paragraphs
of section 5.1.2.
As is beginning to appear typical, the text of these sections is
inconsistent. sections 3.1.b, the first paragraph of section 3.2 and
section 3.3 makes no mention of EC approval/affirmation/confirmation of
WG/TAG Chairs or Vice Chairs. The first and last paragraphs of section
5.1.2 clearly requires such EC approval/affirmation/confirmation of
WG/TAG Chairs or Vice Chairs. This is a textbook case of why the
rules/specifications for any given item should NEVER be stated in more
than one place.
My current view on the 802.20 election issue.
The presence of the requirement in 5.1.2 that the EC confirm WG/TAG
Chairs and Vice Chairs clearly implies, at least to me, that the EC may
elect to not confirm the Chair and/or Vice Chairs of a WG or TAG if and
when something appears amiss. The fact that no criteria is stated for
determining whether to confirm or not confirm is to allow the members of
the EC to use their experience and best judgment as to when something
appears to be amiss and not restrict the criteria they use come to that
conclusion. The lack of criteria is, I believe, a strength of the LMSC Rules/P&P.
If the EC elects to not initially confirm a WG/TAG Chair and/or Vice
Chair for whatever concern, there is nothing that prevents the EC from
later electing to confirm a WG/TAG Chair and/or Vice Chair if those
concerns are resolved to the satisfaction of the EC.
I agree with the assertions of several members of the EC there were no
evidence of irregularities in the mechanics of the 802.20 elections.
That however does not mean that there were no irregularities.
Section 5.1.3.1 of the LMSC Rules/P&P requires among other things
"Working Group members shall participate in the consensus process in a
manner consistent with their professional expert opinion as individuals,
and not as organizational representatives."
It is in compliance with this requirement where some issues have been
raised. An observer at the EC meeting expressed concern during the EC
debate of the 802.20 election confirmation issue that block voting had
occurred. Expression of such a concern at an EC meeting is not a normal
occurrence. I have also hear hearsay statements that 802.20 WG packing
and organization direction of WG member voting occurred. Does this mean
that irregularities occurred, no. But it does say to me that
irregularities may have occurred and the concerns need to be
investigated and resolved before the EC can consider a change in its
position on the results of the 802.20 elections.
I voted abstain on the confirmation motion at the EC meeting as I had
not resolved for myself the wiser path. At this point, I support the EC
decision to not confirm the results of the 802.20 elections.
I believe the first order of business is to investigate the issued raised.
Thanks,
wlq