RE: [802SEC] RE: Motion - Rules Change to add a second SEC vice c hair
Hi Bob,
Thanks for the input, justifiably so.
The point I am still asking Paul is should 5.1.4.5 be in the original motion, and should a similar clause to this be added at a latter time to the LMSC section.
With regards to cause or just etc.... I don't really care which, but I would like to know for my own delectation what that means, and what is the breath or legalese, but after this motion has moved ahead.
Thanks Bob,
Stuart
"Grow, Bob"
<bob.grow@intel.com> To: Stuart Kerry/SVL/SC/PHILIPS@AMEC
Sent by: stds-802-sec@ieee.org
owner-stds-802-sec@majordo cc:
mo.ieee.org Subject: RE: [802SEC] RE: Motion - Rules Change to add a second SEC vice c hair
Classification:
04/02/2002 14:22
Stuart:
If you look at the .pdf attached to the ballot, the only change to that
section was grammar consistent with more than one Vice Chair (addition of
the word "a"). I expect Paul searched the document for the word "vice" to
assure that grammar in all cases was appropriate. Other than 3.2b), all
other changes are editorial changes to support more than one Vice Chair.
The addition of "just" before "cause" would be redundant in any case.
--Bob Grow
-----Original Message-----
From: stuart.kerry@philips.com [mailto:stuart.kerry@philips.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 2:09 PM
To: stds-802-sec@ieee.org
Subject: [802SEC] RE: Motion - Rules Change to add a second SEC vice
chair
Paul,
Please could you clarify the item addressed below, in your MOTION "Rules
Change to add a second SEC vice chair".
5.1.4.5 Removal of Working Group Chairs or Vice Chairs.
The LMSC Executive Committee may remove the Chair or a Vice Chair of a
Working Group or TAG for cause.
Surely this is not part of this MOTION, if it is maybe you should have
included in the MOTION:
"Removal of the SEC Chair, SEC Vice Chairs, Working Group Chairs, WG Vice
Chairs or TAG Chairs. The LMSC Executive Committee may remove the SEC Chair
or a SEC Vice Chair or a Working Group or TAG Chair or there Vice Chair(s)
for JUST cause."
This assumes that CAUSE is clearly defined or left so nebulous that anything
can be.
PLEASE CLARIFY this point whether it is in the motion or is inappropriate to
this motion.
I do think though that we do have a hole in our rules that needs to be
clarified better regarding this very point. If it is not in this motion then
separate one may be required at a later date.
I await you answer.
Respectfully,
Stuart J. Kerry
Chairperson, IEEE 802.11 WLANs WG