Re: [RPRWG] [Fwd: [802SEC] +++ SEC Rules Change Letter Ballot +++Ballot on WG electronic voting]
The "<30%" abstention rate is a requirement for IEEE sponsor ballots.
We adopted it in 802.3 because we wanted to align our WG ballot
rules as closely as possible with the sponsor ballot rules.
A couple of points about the 30% abstention rate:
As working groups grow larger, older, and start taking on projects
with somewhat diverse interest groups, the abstention rate can
become a problem. We have faced this on occasion in 802.3. Our
response has been to A) beat the bushes for more votes, B) vote
(during a meeting) to suspend the abstention rule. Note also
that we do not apply the <30% abstention rule to votes taken
at meetings.
At the IEEE-SA RevCom and Standards Board, abstentions are given
a cold reception. In the past, there have been organized attempts
to kill a standard with abstentions, and this is considered foul
play. Thus, the standards board usually follows a similar process
to what I described for 802.3. That is, they will first encourage
the sponsor to find some more non-abstention votes, and if that
fails, they will overlook abstention rates which slightly exceed
the 30% limit. I haven't yet seen a case where the abstentions
significantly exceeded the 30% limit.
On the whole, I think that the limit on abstentions is a good thing.
Voting members of the WG must actively participate in the decision
making process. This means that they must take the time to
understand the issue (in the case of a motion) or review a draft,
and form an opinion, and cast a vote. Standards bodies are not
passive entertainment, and you shouldn't request voting rights and
responsibilities in a WG unless you intend to exercise those rights
and responsibilities.
Howard Frazier