RE: [RPRWG] Re: Comments from Non-Members
Vinay,
Proxy'ing on behalf of a nonmember is something we cannot censure,
since it cannot be reliably detected. Mike's comments are good
guidance: don't proxy a comment unless you agree, understand,
and are willing to defend the comment.
In that sense, its not really a proxy, but a personal comment
based on insights provided by others. While I often find
concerns through reading, I also find some through points
mentioned by others. So, this is really nothing new...
And a happy new year,
DVJ
David V. James
3180 South Ct
Palo Alto, CA 94306
Home: +1.650.494.0926
+1.650.856.9801
Cell: +1.650.954.6906
Fax: +1.360.242.5508
Base: dvj@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-stds-802-17@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> [mailto:owner-stds-802-17@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Vinay Bannai
>> Sent: Thursday, January 02, 2003 12:59 PM
>> To: Mike Takefman; Robert D. Love
>> Cc: Tom Alexander; Castellano, Robert; 802.17
>> Subject: RE: [RPRWG] Re: Comments from Non-Members
>>
>>
>>
>> Mike,
>>
>> I have a slight reservation about proxying of comments. There is a
>> reason we all attend the standards meeting. We attend it several times a
>> year to gain voting rights and present our positions and later comment
>> on the draft standard. My personal opinion is that we should tread very
>> carefully on proxying of comments on behalf of non-members. Since the
>> proxy comments are now submitted by a voting member, they now carry the
>> full weight of a comment submitted by a voter.
>>
>> How are we going to keep track of who is proxying for whom? Isn't this a
>> dilution of our voting rights and responsibilities?
>>
>> Thanks
>> Vinay
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Mike Takefman [mailto:tak@xxxxxxxxx]
>> Sent: Thursday, January 02, 2003 8:28 AM
>> To: Robert D. Love
>> Cc: 'Tom Alexander'; Castellano, Robert; 802.17
>> Subject: [RPRWG] Re: Comments from Non-Members
>>
>>
>> In the past we have accepted comments from anyone
>> who cared to submit them. I do not see this changing.
>>
>> I agree with Bob, that a non member does not have the
>> right to have their rejected comment carried forward
>> as an unresolved negative.
>>
>> If Bob or anyone chooses to submit a comment on
>> behalf of another person, I strongly urge them to
>> review the comment, agree with it and be able to
>> argue for it.
>>
>> mike
>> --
>> Michael Takefman tak@xxxxxxxxx
>> Manager of Engineering, Cisco Systems
>> Chair IEEE 802.17 Stds WG
>> 2000 Innovation Dr, Ottawa, Canada, K2K 3E8
>> voice: 613-254-3399 cell:613-220-6991
>>