RE: [802SEC] RE: Motion - Rules Change to add a second SEC vice chair
Stuart,
You are correct, the structure of the letter ballot is somewhat ambiguous.
Please let me clarify--
The letter ballot covers all the text contained in the BOX OUTLINE of the
PDF file, including the sentence contained in 5.1.4.5 that you point out.
Please remember, the intent of the text change is simply to correct the
grammar from the current text of one of the sentences contained in 5.1.4.5:
"The LMSC Executive Committee may remove the Chair or Vice Chair of a
Working Group or TAG for cause."
to allow for the case where multiple Vice Chairs may exist:
"The LMSC Executive Committee may remove the Chair or <<a>> Vice Chair of a
Working Group or TAG for cause."
The change does not intend to fully replace 5.1.4.5 with the single sentence
above. The full text contained under 5.1.4.5 does define the conditions
under which a Chair a Vice Chair may be removed by referring to the Computer
Society Standards Activities Board Policies and Procedures.
I apologize for the confusion. I hope this resolves your concern.
--Paul
----Original Message-----
From: owner-stds-802-sec@majordomo.ieee.org
[mailto:owner-stds-802-sec@majordomo.ieee.org]On Behalf Of
stuart.kerry@philips.com
Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 5:09 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