Re: [chairs] Subtleties in the OASIS TC Member Attendance Rules

[eduardo <Eduardo.Gutentag@Sun.COM>]

Hal,

why are you counting in 4's rather than in 3's?
See below.

Hal Lockhart wrote:

>Harri Reddy recently drew my attention to an aspect of the TC membership
>rules which I had not correctly understood. Perhaps this is old news to some
>of you, but I believe it would surprise most OASIS members.
>
>Suppose a member misses 2 meetings in a row. They are sent a warning and
>they attend the next meeting. So far so good. However, unless they attend
>the NEXT meeting, they will lose membership, as they will have missed 3 out
>of 4 meetings. In other words, the pattern N-N-Y-N should be treated the
>same as N-Y-N-N.
>
If you count in threes, your first pattern becomes N-Y-N (missed 2 out 
of 3), and
the second pattern becomes Y-N-N (missed 2 out of 3, same as above, and 
therefore
both should be threated the same. It's like there is a slide with a 
3-meeting hole that
you slide over the sequence of meetings, and it slides one space to the 
right
every time there is a meeting.

(Please note that the first reading of the pattern once the TC is 
established can
never start with an N, because in order to be in the TC the first must 
be Y, by
definition).

BTW, the intention was always that most of this (warnings, termination, 
etc.) was
going to be somewhat at the chair's discretion, and that chairs would 
observe these rules
as strictly as necessary (or not) in order to make sure quorum was 
obtainable.

>
>Yet it seems completely unintuitive to send a warning to someone right after
>they have attended a meeting. On the other hand, it seems unintuitive to
>terminate someone who attended the previous meeting and received no warning
>message.
>

No, the warning would be sent after someone did not attend a meeting. 
Remember, the
series always begins with a Y, because the member must have attended the 
first
meeting:
Y-N-N[warning]-Y-N[termination]
Y-Y-N-Y-N[warning]-N[termination]
Y-Y-N-Y-Y-N-N[warning]-Y-Y-N-Y-N[warning]-Y-N[warning]-Y-N[warning]-Y-N[termination?]

The question mark above is because it is certainly at the chair's 
discretion to determine whether
the member has been consistent in his/her absences.

HTH

>
>Actually it is not entirely clear this this is legal under the TC rules
>which say:
>
>(i). A member shall be warned by mail from the chair of the TC upon their
>first failure to attend two out of every three successive meetings of the
>TC. Membership shall be terminated if the member fails to attend the next
>meeting following transmittal of the warning or if the member consistently
>fails to attend two out of every three meetings.
>
>(this section is not affected by Karl's proposed changes)
>
>This seems to say that a) it is only necessary to warn a person once and b)
>you can only terminate the immediately after a warning (except in the case
>of consistent absences).
>
>Why did I never notice this before? I think because in the TCs I have been
>in either people come to practically every meeting or show up rarely or
>never.
>
>I am not ready to propose new wording for the TC process, but I do think
>that we need to send out three different messages to warn people.
>
>1) N-Y-N just a warning saying they must attend the next meeting
>
>2) N-N a warning saying they must attend the next 2 meetings
>
>3) N-N-Y a message saying that even though they attended the last meeting
>they must still attend the next meeting.
>
>Comments?
>
>Hal
>
>
>You may leave a Technical Committee at any time by visiting http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/chairs/members/leave_workgroup.php
>
>  
>

-- 
Eduardo Gutentag               |         e-mail: eduardo.gutentag@Sun.COM
Web Technologies and Standards |         Phone:  +1 510 550 4616 x31442
Sun Microsystems Inc.          |         
W3C AC Rep / OASIS TAB Chair