Re: [802SEC] request for your views on attendance credit
Roger-
The rule:
- "Attendance at RR-TAG sessions also counts as attendance in the
member's home WG subject to an agreement between the RR-TAG chair and
member's home WG chair. Such home WG credit may apply only to a single WG
that the member specifies."
had the specific purpose of allowing a designated representative(s)
of a WG to attend RR-TAG meetings with no penalty to their attendance
record in the WG they were representing at the RR-TAG. It would be my
judgement that any such person who wishes this privilege should arrange
for it in advance.
For those who wish to legitimately maintain voting membership in two
Working Group, they may do that by doing full sign-in to one WG during
even numbered plenaries and another WG in odd numbered plenaries.
For those who try to sign-in to more than one meeting during a particular
time slot, I believe that one of the following remedies is
appropriate.
- 1) Assume that attendance in each WG is equal and therefore neither
meets the 75% requirement. Therefore each should be stricken.
- 2) The signee takes it upon himself to declare that his attendance in
a particular group was >75% and the other less than >25%. That
makes the group for which there should be no attendance credit given
obvious and the other record can be corrected.
Geoff
At 01:21 PM 10/3/2003 -0600, Roger B. Marks wrote:
Dear EC colleagues,
I am seeking your opinions on a Working Group participation credit
question. The issue is related to participation in simultaneous Working
Group sessions.
An 802.16 Member, David Trinkwon, has requested that I grant him credit
for having participated in our Session #24 (the Dallas 802 Plenary in
March 2003). My initial response was that, since he signed in to only one
meeting interval (and to two more in which he indicated that he was
attending 802.18), I had not granted him session credit and would deny
his request. David mentioned that he had attended two additional
intervals in 802.18 but that somehow the records had not been properly
maintained. 802.18 then granted his request for the two additional
credits. According the EC-approved 802.18 Policies and Procedures,
"Attendance at RR-TAG sessions also counts as attendance in the
member's home WG subject to an agreement between the RR-TAG chair and
member's home WG chair. Such home WG credit may apply only to a single WG
that the member specifies." Under that clause, David would have
credit for five 802.16 meeting intervals, which was the minimum
requirement.
However, I then came across the fact that David had received credit for
participating in all eight of the meeting intervals of the 802.20 Working
Group, which was holding its first session that week. I wrote this to
David:
As you know, "sign-in during a meeting
interval requires attendance during substantially the entire meeting
interval."
I understand that you are saying that you attended substantially all of
the 802.18 meetings that ran Tuesday (8am-5:11pm) and Wednesday
(8:15am-10:07 am and 1:05-5pm).
However, I also understand that you are on record as having participated
in all eight of the 802.20 meetings during that week. These ran from
8:10-4:45 on Tuesday, and 8:30-4:45 on Wednesday.
I see a contradiction here. However, I haven't yet decided how to resolve
it. I might simply rule that, according to the evidence available to me,
you did not participate in Session #26. Alternatively, I might forward
your request to my colleagues on the 802 Executive Committee and request
their views on it before I make a decision.
I won't forward all of David's response, but he continues to seek the
session participation credit, and he said "I'd be happy to review
these topics at the 802 Exec level."
Before we get any farther into this, I'd like to ask your views on this
matter. Based on the information I have provided, would you recommend
that I grant the 802.16 participation credit, or not?
Roger