Re: [$ieee-1850] Some further P&P issues

Hi Erich,

On Thu, Oct 07, 2004 at 07:47:56AM -0700, Erich Marschner wrote:
> Hi Johan,
>
> On the first item (my suggested tightening of the revision you
> proposed yesterday), if I don't hear any objections in the next few
> hours, I will go ahead and make a motion to adopt the new wording.
>
> On the last item you mention below, I agree that the wording does not
> say what we exect it to mean. Your suggestions to replace it with
> "Consensus is defined as a majority agreement. Unanimity is thus not
> required." is much more clear. I would only suggest that we conjoin
> the two statements with a semicolon rather than 'thus' - i.e.,
>
> Consensus is defined as a majority agreement; unanimity is not
> required.
>
> I will motion to adopt that change as well.
Fine!
>
> On the other issue you raise below, I agree that the situation is not
> explicitly addressed. Clearly the worst case would be that the
> existing rules apply (membership after attending two successive
> meetings as a corporate IEEE-SA member, without regard to any
> attendance prior to becoming a corporate IEEE-SA member). You are
> asking whether we ought to add a clause that accelerates granting of
> membership and voting rights if a new corporate IEEE-SA member is
> represented by a DR who has been attending working group members
> already as an observer.
>
> I believe that the IEEE would like to encourage observers' companies
> to become corporate IEEE-SA members, so I believe that the IEEE would
> support such an addition to our P&Ps. I also think it would be
> appropriate to recognize such prior participation. I would think that
> working group members would be unlikely to object, though of course I
> could be wrong about that. I suspect the main problem is getting the
> wording right.
>
> Perhaps the following paragraph would be appropriate (added after the
> paragraph that begins "Membership and voting priveleges shall be
> granted ..." and before the paragraph that begins "The entity
> (member), through its DR or DRA, ..."):
>
> "Membership and voting priveleges shall be granted immediately to an
> entity that has just become qualified to be a member of the working
> group, provided that the DR of that entity has attended the last 2
> meetings of the working group as an observer for that entity."
>
> Does this address your concern? If so, I'll propose that we adopt it.

Yes, except that I am not sure whether we should require the prior
attendance of the DR or perhaps the DR or some DRA or perhaps just some
representative of the entity. Part of the reason I am not sure is that
it's not clear to me what counts as entity attendance in the first
place.

Regards, Johan M

>
> Regards,
>
> Erich

>
>
>
> | -----Original Message-----
> | From: owner-ieee-1850@eda.org
> | [mailto:owner-ieee-1850@eda.org] On Behalf Of Johan Mårtensson
> | Sent: Thursday, October 07, 2004 3:52 AM
> | To: ieee-1850@eda.org
> | Subject: [$ieee-1850] Some further P&P issues
> |
> | Erich,
> |
> | On Wed, Oct 06, 2004 at 09:35:25AM -0700, Erich Marschner wrote:
> | >
> | > except that I would recommend tightening it up just a bit further:
> | >
> | > "The Chair and Vice-Chair shall each be an IEEE member of
> | any grade,
> | > and also an individual IEEE-SA member, and also a Designated
> | > Representative (DR) of an entity that is a corporate
> | IEEE-SA member."
> | >
> | > Would you agree?
> |
> | This is fine with me. Since we are re-reviewing anyway, I
> | have two other issues. The first and more important is that
> | section 7. doesn't seem to contain any provisions for the
> | case that an observing entity acquires IEEE-SA membership, or
> | rather it seems a little unclear what rules apply.
> |
> | One possible interpretation is that if a non-member entity
> | that has had representatives attending all along becomes an
> | SA member after the first three meetings then the rule
> | applying to SA members that start attending for the first
> | time at some time after the first three meeting is applicable
> | also in this case, i.e. that voting rights shall be granted
> | only after attendance at two consecutive meetings of the WG
> | after acquiring SA membership.
> |
> | One other possibility is that a new SA member will be granted
> | voting rights based on its attendance record also prior to
> | acquiring SA membership.
> |
> | It might be wise to leave this unresolved, I just point it out.
> |
> | The second thing is the definition of 'Consensus' at the end
> | of Section
> | 3: "Consensus is defined as a majority agreement, but not
> | unanimity". I may be engaged in hairsplitting at this point
> | but it sounds to me as if we have unanimity then we don't
> | have consensus according to this definition. Would't it be
> | better either simply to omit the ", but not unanimity" clause
> | or expand a little: "Consensus is defined as a majority
> | agreement. Unanimity is thus not required." or "Consensus is
> | defined as a majority agreement, not as unanimity."
> |
> | Best Regards,
> |
> | Johan M.
> |
> | > Does anyone disagree with this? If this is acceptable,
> | I'll motion to
> | > adopt the above sentence in place of the current sentence
> | in the P&Ps.
> | >
> | > Regards,
> | >
> | > Erich
> | >
> | > | -----Original Message----- | From: owner-ieee-1850@eda.org |
> | > [mailto:owner-ieee-1850@eda.org] On Behalf Of Johan
> | Mårtensson | Sent:
> | > Wednesday, October 06, 2004 4:02 AM | To: ieee-1850@eda.org
> | | Subject:
> | > [$ieee-1850] Unclear sentence in P&P | | Hi, | | I know we already
> | > ratified the P&P, but still I would like to | suggest a
> | rewriting of
> | > the second sentence of section 6: | | "The Chair and
> | Vice-Chair shall
> | > be IEEE members of any grade, | individual IEEE-SA members,
> | and must
> | > also be a Designated | Representative (DR) of an entity that is a
> | > corporate IEEE-SA member." | | There is a strange shift from the
> | > plural into the singular at | the second comma, and also I
> | don't think
> | > it is made fully | clear that the officers must both be individual
> | > IEEE members | and in addition to that individual IEEE-SA
> | members (if
> | > indeed | that is what is meant). So I suggest either of the
> | following
> | > | wordings: | | | "The Chair and Vice-Chair shall be IEEE members of
> | > any grade, | and also individual IEEE-SA members, and must
> | also be |
> | > Designated Representatives | (DR) of some entity that is a
> | corporate
> | > IEEE-SA member." | | or | | "The Chair and Vice-Chair shall
> | be an IEEE
> | > member of any | grade, and also an individual IEEE-SA
> | member, and must
> | > also | be a Designated Representative (DR) of an entity that is a |
> | > corporate IEEE-SA member." | | Best Regards, Johan M | | -- |
> | > ------------------------------------------------------------ | Johan
> | > Martensson, PhD Office: +46 31 7451913 | R&D
> | > Mobile: +46 703749681 | Safelogic AB Fax: +46 31
> | > 7451939 | Arvid Hedvalls Backe 4
> | > johan.martensson@safelogic.se | SE-411 33 Gothenburg,
> | SWEDEN | PGP key
> | > ID A8857A60 | www.safelogic.se |
> | > ------------------------------------------------------------ | | |
> |
> | --
> | ------------------------------------------------------------
> | Johan Martensson, PhD Office: +46 31 7451913
> | R&D Mobile: +46 703749681
> | Safelogic AB Fax: +46 31 7451939
> | Arvid Hedvalls Backe 4 johan.martensson@safelogic.se
> | SE-411 33 Gothenburg, SWEDEN
> | PGP key ID A8857A60
> | www.safelogic.se
> | ------------------------------------------------------------
> |
> |
> |

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------
Johan Martensson, PhD            Office: +46 31 7451913    	
R&D                              Mobile: +46 703749681
Safelogic AB                     Fax: +46 31 7451939
Arvid Hedvalls Backe 4           johan.martensson@safelogic.se
SE-411 33 Gothenburg, SWEDEN 
PGP key ID A8857A60
www.safelogic.se
------------------------------------------------------------