[802SEC] RE: [802SEC] [802SEC] RE: [802SEC] EC electronic ballot on 802.22 press release (CLEAN version of document attached)
I vote approve.
RE: what deserves a press release:
I agree that press releases should be reserved for specific achievements
and milestones. From that point of view, this one qualifies. Proposal
selection is fairly frequently a difficult process on which some groups
stumble or disolve. It also is often a more interesting time to the
press - I've had to deal with my share of Chicken Little stories from
the press during that period of projects. Therefore, the successful
conclusion of the proposal selection process is a significant milestone.
Regards,
Pat
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-stds-802-sec@ieee.org [mailto:owner-stds-802-sec@ieee.org]
On Behalf Of Roger B. Marks
Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2006 2:12 PM
To: wk3c@WK3C.COM
Cc: stds-802-sec@IEEE.ORG
Subject: [802SEC] [802SEC] RE: [802SEC] EC electronic ballot on 802.22
press release (CLEAN version of document attached)
I vote Approve.
I agree with John Hawkins that we should reserve press releases for
specific concrete achievements. In my mind, starting WG Letter Ballot is
the first concrete achievement in a project.
However, while the EC discusses its view on the policy, I'm willing to
vote Approve on this one.
Roger
At 05:00 PM -0500 06/03/30, Carl R. Stevenson wrote:
>I sent the "track changes" version with the ballot so Roger and others
>could see the changes from the version I posted with the original
>motion to address Roger's helpful comments.
>
>Attached is a "CLEAN" version (changes accepted) for those who prefer
that.
>(If one ignores the "track changes" showing the delta, they are
>identical.)
>
>Since there will still be at least 10 days prior to the close of the
>ballot, the previously noted closing time stands.
>
>Regards,
>Carl
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Roger B. Marks [mailto:r.b.marks@ieee.org]
>> Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2006 3:02 PM
>> To: wk3c@WK3C.COM
>> Cc: stds-802-sec@ieee.org
>> Subject: Re: [802SEC] EC electronic ballot on 802.22 press release
>>
>> Carl,
>>
>> If this were a recirc, I think it would be fine to send around a
>> marked-up copy for review.
>> However, in a new ballot, I think that the voters need to see a
>> clean copy. Otherwise, I think you introduce unnecessary ambiguity
>> add make the task of the voters unnecessarily complicated.
>>
>> Since you had already distributed a preview copy, I understand why
>> you wanted to show markups. But, on principle, I think it is
>> important that the ballot group members see a clean copy and know
>> that this is the document they are voting to approve.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Roger
>>
>>
>> At 02:38 PM -0500 06/03/30, Carl R. Stevenson wrote:
>> >Dear all,
>> >
>> >Paul has delegated it to me to conduct an EC electronic ballot on
>> the >approval of the attached proposed 802.22 press release.
>> >
>> >In response to my earlier motion, I received some editorial
>> comments from >Roger, which I appreciate and think add clarity, so
>> I'm attaching a "r1"
>> >version of the document which shows the changes that Roger
>> suggested and I >find acceptable and THAT is the version that's the
>> subject of this ballot.
>> >
>> >MOVE: That the EC approve the release of the attached press
>> release on >802.22's progress (document PR_P02_22V4r1.doc).
>> >Moved: Stevenson
>> >Second: Shellhammer (Dr. Shellhammer has read the document -
>> including the >editorial changes in "r1" - and agreed to 2nd my
>> motion.) > >INFORMATIONAL - this DRAFT press release accurately
>> states the current >status of 802.22 and points to the significant
>> progress that
>> 802.22 has
>> >achieved by going from 10 initial proposals to a single merged
>> proposal
>> >(baseline) between November 2005 and March 2006. I think that,
>> coupled with >Stuart's press release indicating similar movement
>> towards consensus in one >of his TGs, it is important to give 802
>> some positive press rather than >simply >allowing them to feed on
>> the occasional contentious deadlock as has, >unfortunately, been the
>> case in the past.
>> >(Karen McCabe had reviewed, edited, and approved the previously
>> circulated >version (prior to Roger's editorial suggestions), so I
>> am simultaneously >cc'ing the "r1" version attached to her for her
>> review and approval and do >not anticipate that she will have any
>> problems with the editorial changes >that Roger suggested and I've
>> accepted. However, regardless of the EC vote >on this ballot, I
>> will not ask Karen to release the press release in the >event she
>> does have problems with the changes. I will also inform the EC
>> >ASAP if she indicates to me that she *does* have any problems with
>> the >changes and I will re-start the clock on the ballot on a "r2"
>> version that >addresses any unanticipated issues she may have with
>> the revised version.)
> > >
>> >This ("10 day")EC e-mail ballot will close at 11:59 pm EST on
>> April 9th, >2006, or when all EC members have voted, whichever comes
>> first.
>> >
>> >Your prompt attention to voting will be appreciated.
>> >
>> >Regards,
>> >Carl
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >----------
>> >This email is sent from the 802 Executive >Committee email
>> reflector. This list is >maintained by Listserv.
>> >
>> >Attachment converted: Little Al:PR_P802 22V4_r1.doc
>> (WDBN/<IC>) (000B3485)
>>
>>
>>
>
>----------
>This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector.
>This list is maintained by Listserv.
>
>Attachment converted: Little Al:PR_P802 22V4_r1_CLEAN.doc (WDBN/<IC>)
>(000B3766)
----------
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.