[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [office] Coordination Call Attendance
Rob, I hadn't been thinking about the conditions on what minutes are for. I don't think I've ever heard that laid out in that way. Thank you. From a protocol point of view, I do recall their being standing items to report on the membership and attendance and perhaps that is how things got into the minutes (although people may have just been doing it as inherited craft, without knowing the principle). I believe that would work in this instance, although I guess technically it is a report and reports have a funny status. I see in Robert's Rules that Minutes are expected to be quite spare and account for actions and not much else. However, the two-tiered membership makes that a little trickier, and it would be weirder to put such a report anywhere else. Interesting. - Dennis -----Original Message----- From: robert_weir@us.ibm.com [mailto:robert_weir@us.ibm.com] http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/office/200810/msg00010.html Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2008 17:54 To: 'OpenDocument Mailing List' Subject: RE: [office] Coordination Call Attendance Dennis, I'm not concerned so much with the burden. My greater concern is that we do not stray from what minutes are. Minutes of a meeting record the time the meeting started, the attendance, a description of items discussed and actions taken, and the time the meeting was adjourned. It should not contain random facts, even useful facts, that were not part of the meeting. If we start recording other information and then approving minutes that contain such information, which was never presented in the meeting and thus the TC never had the opportunity to discuss, challenge or correct the information, then we have a different kind of problem. Now I have seen other bodies have a set part of the agenda where they review who has voting rights. For example INCITS V1, the US JTC1/SC34 shadow committee does this after attendance is taken in each meeting. Since the voting membership list was presented in the meeting, it can legitimately be recorded in the minutes. Is there interest in doing something similar, i.e., having a short segment at the start of each TC call, where we list which members present have voting rights? This would then trickle into the minutes. -Rob "Dennis E. Hamilton" <dennis.hamilton@acm.org> wrote on 10/02/2008 10:11:24 AM: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/office/200810/msg00006.html > Rob, > > That is interesting about recording votes and such. That was not anything > that figured in my request, even though I did cast a nay vote on the last > call (and I must remind Michael to identify me in the minutes). > > My interest was in accounting for the voting membership and attendance over > time, since the current state on the TC page is not helpful with regard to > knowing what the voting participation was at a prior time. I have no axe to > grind about this. I was simply taken aback that it wasn't done already and > easily available. (My experience in the matter is quite dated; I had > thought that this kind of tracking was the usual practice in standards > development and other membership-based committee efforts.) [ ... ]
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]