Re: [802SEC] FW: new work
Bob,
That is why I am asking to get everyone's opinions. I find that
tallying the ballots separately is a chore, and folks have often
complained that I send so much to the reflector that they can't track it
all.
Really, the way we do things the vote counts on these ballots don't
matter. All that matters is the finally approval vote is session. What
does matter is collecting everyone's comments and getting all the issues
aired. I felt it is possible to do this with a single ballot file,
making it easier overall to track since it is all in one place. But I
am flexible.
Any other comments?
Mat
Matthew Sherman, Ph.D.
Senior Member Technical Staff
BAE SYSTEMS, CNIR
Office: +1 973.633.6344
email: matthew.sherman@baesystems.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Bob O'Hara (boohara) [mailto:boohara@cisco.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 11:54 AM
To: Sherman, Matthew J. (US SSA); STDS-802-SEC@listserv.ieee.org
Subject: RE: [802SEC] FW: new work
Mat,
If you already have the separate files, why do they need to be combined
and balloted together? I would rather that these be balloted
separately. It makes it easier to read and to comment on them for the
balloters.
-Bob
-----Original Message-----
From: Sherman, Matthew J. (US SSA)
[mailto:matthew.sherman@BAESYSTEMS.COM]
Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 8:18 AM
To: STDS-802-SEC@listserv.ieee.org
Subject: [802SEC] FW: new work
Folks,
Just so you have an idea of what I will be 'batching', here are some of
the proposed changes from ML. In addition I will have a recommended
change from Geoff on the adding of 'proprietary' footers etc. on e-mail
and other contributions. I will be the EC member proposing the ballots.
What I will do is present to the EC on Friday each 'rationale' and step
through the changes quickly. If there is substantial objection to
balloting a specific change, I will divide the question and vote that
specific rationale and proposed change separately. Hopefully this will
make for a more efficient process. Again, if people think this is a bad
idea, please let me know.
Mat
Matthew Sherman, Ph.D.
Senior Member Technical Staff
BAE SYSTEMS, CNIR
Office: +1 973.633.6344
email: matthew.sherman@baesystems.com
-----Original Message-----
From: m.nielsen@ieee.org [mailto:m.nielsen@ieee.org]
Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2005 8:19 PM
To: Sherman, Matthew J. (US SSA)
Subject: new work
OK, Mat, here's my cut at the new work, in four documents:
WG Structure
Study Groups
WG ballot recircs
Clause 9
LMK what you think. I will check email later tonight and will be at work
tomorrow.
ml
(See attached file: 802.0-ballot-recircs--D1.doc)(See attached file:
802.0-sect-9--D1.doc)(See attached file: 802.0-SG_Process--D1.doc)(See
attached file: 802.0-WG_Structure--D1.doc)
----------
This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector.
This list is maintained by Listserv.
----------
This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector. This list is maintained by Listserv.