Re: [STDS-802-16] UPDATE: voting on P802.16-REVd/D4 Sponsor Ballot comment resolution
At 14:49 -0500 04/04/29, Bob Nelson wrote:
>Sorry to bug you again so soon....
>
>I'm assuming the intent of the voting procedure is to vote aye/nay
>on the revised recommendation from the originator. This works fine
>for recommendations to accept or accept-modified. But what is the
>result of voting reject on a comment where the recommendation is to
>reject, acceptance of the original comment submission?
Bob,
We aren't voting to accept or reject the commentor's recommendation;
we are voting to accept or reject the proposed change.
If the commentor recommends "Reject", then we are being urged to vote "Reject".
Of course, it's preferable if people just Withdraw comments that they
no longer support. But that didn't always happen.
>Also there are 33 entries where no recommendation was provided. Does
>the statement "comment as it stands" mean the vote is made against
>the original comment submission?
Yes.
Roger
>Thanks
>Bob
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Roger B. Marks [mailto:r.b.marks@ieee.org]
>Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2004 1:32 PM
>To: IEEE 802.16 Members
>Subject: UPDATE: voting on P802.16-REVd/D4 Sponsor Ballot comment
>resolution
>
>THE COMMENT FILE HAS BEEN UPDATED TO 20r4. THE 20r3 VERSION IS
>DEFECTIVE DUE TO LOSS OF TYPE STYLES.
>
>This note provides the instructions for voting on the resolution of
>comments in the P802.16-REVd/D4 Sponsor Ballot recirc.
>
>I have been working very hard on a new version of Commentary that
>would make this voting a easier. However, I am having a lot of
>trouble getting it to compile under Windows, so I have given up.
>Instead, we will use the old Commentary, which has the same content.
>
>I've notified the reflector that the proposed comment resolutions on
>which we are voting are at
><http://ieee802.org/16/docs/04/80216-04_20r4.zip>. You will need to
>consider the fields "Recommendation", "Proposed Resolution", "Reason
>for Recommendation", and "Recommendation by". You will also, in many
>cases, need to consider the original Comment and Suggested Remedy
>near the top of the layout. The page and line numbers at the top are
>also sometimes needed to interpret the comment. You may find it
>worthwhile to study the reply comments and see how well they have
>been addressed in the proposed resolutions.
>
>The voting process works this way:
>
>(1) Only Working Group members <http://ieee802.org/16/members.html>
>are eligible.
>
>(2) Type your name in the "Resolution of Group" field. That is not
>where a name usually goes, but we'll use that field anyway.
>
>(3) Under the menu item "Records," choose "Replace" to put your name
>in the "Resolution of Group" of EVERY comment. Check to make sure it
>worked.
>
>(4) For each comment, use the "Decision of Group" field to cast your
>vote. The choices will be interpreted this way:
>
> "Accepted" => Vote to approve the comment as it stands
> "Rejected" => Vote to disapprove the comment as it stands
> Anything else => Vote to abstain on the issue of that comment
> For example: "Accepted-modified" will be counted as "abstain"
>
>You need not vote on the comments marked "Withdrawn," as they will be
>ignored.
>
>(5) When you have finished, make sure you are showing all 376
>comments (see the count in the grey area on the left) and then, under
>the menu item "Scripts," choose "Export Group Resolutions."
>
>(6) Select the file type "FilerMaker Pro Runtime". Name the file in
>the format "CommentVote_Name.USR", where "Name" is a version of your
>name that I will recognize. Save the file.
>
>(7) Email the file to me before the deadline. The procedure gives a
>deadline of May 1 AOE, but I'll accept comments until 12 hours beyond
>that time; i.e., until May 2 at noon Pago Pago time (see the clock at
><http://ieee802.org/16/aoe.html>). Unfortunately, the schedule does
>not allow for further slippage.
>
>(8) I will not post any results until after the deadline.
>
>(9) The individual votes of the individual members will be posted to
>the IEEE 802.16 password-protected web site.
>
>(10) To learn what happens afterwards, re-read the procedure.
>
>Please let me know if you have any problems with or questions about
>the process.
>
>Regards,
>
>Roger
>
>
>
>>The deadline for revised IEEE P802.16-REVd/D4 comments has passed.
>>The data is available here:
>> http://ieee802.org/16/docs/04/80216-04_20r4.zip
>>
>>The revised comments are in the fields "Recommendation", "Proposed
>>Resolution", "Reason for Recommendation", and "Recommendation by".
>>
>>We also received a number of new and revised contributions. I've
>>filed most of these on the TGd web page. I'll catch up with the last
>>three soon.
>>
>>The Ballot Resolution Committee (BRC) will now begin considering
>>each of these proposals. Each member may vote either "Accept" or
>>"Reject" on each revised comment. See the procedure document for
>>details.
>>
>>I will email the voting instructions to the BRC separately (I've had
>>some technical difficulties, but I have a backup plan). In the
>>meantime, I suggest that you carefully review the database and begin
>>discussing the final comments with your colleagues as you deem
>>appropriate.
>>
>>Roger
>>
>>
>>>We received 1305 reply comments to the comments received in the
>>>P802.16-REVd/D4 Sponsor Ballot recirculation.
>>>
>>>These reply comments have been added to the comment package, which
>>>is now available:
>>> http://ieee802.org/16/docs/04/80216-04_20r2.zip
>>>
>>>The file is set to open to a layout showing the replies, in
>>>abbreviated form. If more than three replies were submitted for a
>>>given comment, you will need to scroll to see them all. For a more
>>>spacious view of the reply comments, click "See reply details"
>>>above the colored Reply Comment table.
>>>
>>>In accordance with the announced comment resolution procedures:
>>> http://ieee802.org/16/docs/04/80216-04_18r1.pdf
>>>those who submitted the original comments are now invited to
>>>reconsider their comments in the light of:
>>>
>>>(a) the reply comments
>>>(b) other comments in the database that address relevant issues
>>>
>>>To submit your revised comment, please follow the same procedure
>>>for submitting Reply Comments, using the fields "Recommendation ",
>>>" Proposed Resolution ", " Reason for Recommendation ", and "
>>>Recommendation by". Email your revised comment files to
>>>ballot16d@wirelessman.org by Wednesday 28 April AOE (Anywhere on
>>>Earth).
>>>
>>>ADVICE TO COMMENTORS:
>>>
>>>In light of the defined procedure, there will be no opportunity for
>>>the Ballot Resolution Committee (BRC) to alter the revised
>>>comments; the BRC can only accept or reject them. Therefore, those
>>>who submitted comments are strongly encouraged to study the
>>>database, not only with respect to their own comments but also with
>>>respect to related comments. If you have a concern that related
>>>comments might affect yours, please contact the other balloter to
>>>coordinate your responses. Please ensure that your Suggested Remedy
>>>is fully explicit, with detailed changes by page and line number,
>>>so that the editor may implement it without doubt as to your
>>>intent. If your comment refers to an external contribution, please
>>>refer to its explicit contribution number, including the revision
>>>number, at <http://ieee802.org/16/tgd/#Contributions>.
>>>
>>>Please remember that your revised comment will be voted upon,
>>>verbatim, by the BRC. The BRC members, when considering their vote,
>>>will look to see whether your comment makes a convincing argument
>>>in favor of the need for a change to the draft. They will also be
>>>looking for evidence that you have fully addressed all concerns
>>>raised in the reply comments and have considered alternatives
>>>proposed there. You are encouraged eliminate any doubt the BRC
>>>members have doubts about the change.
>>>
>>>Please contact me with any questions.
>>>
>>>Roger