Adrian,
While your post is well written, I think you have confused things by having three sets of lists bulleted starting with a) so that when Roger answered b), I don’t know if he meant b) Both of the home group and the visited group or b) I believe
that single attendance credit is correct.
I agree with Jon’s response:
a)
I believe the current operation is correct (i.e., visited + 1 home)
We agreed to reciprocal credit to allow members of various WGs supply their expertise in groups of cross group interest such as the Radio Regulator TAG and Wireless Coexistance TAG (now WG) without jeopardizing their voting rights in their
home group.
To accomplish the purpose of helping to look out for the needs of their home technology, they need a vote in the cross-group-interest Group so we allow them to get double credit (visited plus 1 home). Overall, the tool’s current operation
is consistent with the discussions I recall when we initiated reciprocal credit.
I haven’t logged attendance for a group with reciprocal credit so I don’t have experience with how it works in the tool. I agree with Jon that one should have the option of not choosing to select a home group if one only wants credit in
the group one is actually attending.
I don’t recall any discussion back when we began this of the additional issue that Jon brings up – i.e. whether one has to be a voter in the home group to get reciprocal credit. I think that would be difficult to implement (especially since
a person can enter a meeting as a non-voter and get voting rights at the meeting). The roll of representing the needs of the technology of your home group assumes you spend some time in the home group so I can see the logic of his point. However, don’t most
of the reciprocal groups meet only part of the week so to get full credit from a home group one would need to attend at least some sessions of the home group?
Regards,
Pat
From: ***** IEEE 802 Executive Committee List ***** [mailto:STDS-802-SEC@ieee.org]
On Behalf Of Jon Rosdahl
Sent: Friday, March 22, 2013 9:58 PM
To: STDS-802-SEC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [802SEC] Interpretation of reciprocal credit "rule"
a)
I believe the current operation is correct (i.e., visited + 1 home)
I think that the tool needs to be fixed in that the prompt is less than informative, and the instructions less than clear.
I will work to get a ticket in place, to fix it up, but our input to help with the final expected operation would be helpful.
I think that only a "voter" can make use of the reciprocal credit option, and it cannot be used to "gain" voting rights, but
only to maintain them.
When Marking Attendance, a choice of which "home" group should be selectable, and if you are attending your home group, and you
only want home credit, that should be an option (currently it is not).
FWIW,
Jon
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, March 22, 2013 4:09 PM
Subject: [802SEC] Interpretation of reciprocal credit "rule"
Dear 802 EC,
As mentioned at the EC meeting today, there is a question of interpretation regarding reciprocal credit.
Although the answer may be buried somewhere in an EC motion or an IEEE-SA staff document before my
time, I cannot find anything in the rules/OM relating to this.
Definitions:
home group – a group in which a user has voting rights
visited group – a group that a user attends, which is granted reciprocal credit by the home group
A voter visits a group and records attendance. The question is simple.
Should the voter get attendance at:
a)
One of the home group and the visited group
b)
Both of the home group and the visited group (current)
And if the voter has multiple home groups should the voter get attendance credit:
a)
One of the home group and visited groups
b)
The visited group and one of the home groups (current)
c)
The visited group and all of the home groups
Current behaviour (modulo a few UI infelicities) is highlighted.
I initially took this to be a bug, because I laboured under the mistaken assumption that
attendance credit should not multiply unnecessarily. (Stephens’ razor).
I’d like to get feedback on how you think the system should behave. Once I get this, I’ll
document this behaviour, and if necessary work with Jon to raise a ticket to change it.
Just to help provide rapid feedback, I have some stock responses prepared below:
a)
I believe the current operation is correct (i.e., visited + 1 home)
b)
I believe single attendance credit is correct (i.e., visited or home)
c)
I don’t do reciprocal credit, I have no opinion
d)
I don’t care, I have no opinion
Best Regards,
Adrian P STEPHENS
Tel: +44 (1793) 404 825
Tel: +44 (7920) 084 900
Tel: +1 (408) 239 7485
----------------------------------------------
Intel Corporation (UK) Limited
Registered No. 1134945 (England)
Registered Office: Pipers Way, Swindon SN3 1RJ
VAT No: 860 2173 47
---------- 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.
----------
This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector. This list is maintained by Listserv.