OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

chairs message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

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

Well, Kavi allows setting RO/RW permissions as well as voting 
permissions. But it seems to me that we're starting to talk about 
defining a new type of member under the TC Process.

Right now the TC Process defines a TC member (who I've set up in Kavi as 
RW, voting), Prospective member (RW, non-vote), and other eligible 
people (an Observer, RO, non-vote).

It sounds to me like you're talking about adding a new type of person, 
the non-voting member (RW, non-vote) who isn't intedning to become a 
member at this time. I know how to do this in Kavi, but I'm not sure 
what to call this type of person under the Process.


Eduardo Gutentag wrote:
> Why? I thought we were precisely talking about changes to the Kavi
> process, *not* the TC process, reflecting in part my concern about
> Kavi changing the TC process (which is what you seem to imply in your
> note) rather than the TC process influencing how things are presented
> in Kavi...
> Karl F. Best wrote:
>> I appreciate the input (and always happy to hear suggestions) but this 
>> is something that I'll have to bring up with the Board's TC Process 
>> subcommittee, who is currently working on a revision of the Process 
>> document.
>> -Karl
>> jon.bosak@sun.com wrote:
>>> It seems that several of us are in agreement on the desirability
>>> of creating an official category for members of a TC mailing list
>>> who are not also members (strictly speaking) of a TC.  The
>>> question is what to call this category.  Scott likes "nonvoting
>>> member" for marketing reasons.  Eduardo and I dislike this
>>> nomenclature because in parliamentary practice (meaning Robert's,
>>> which specifies 99.9 per cent of the rules that govern formal TC
>>> operation) the word "member" means "voting member," "voting
>>> member" is frowned upon as a term containing a redundancy, and
>>> "nonvoting member" is considered to be a contradiction in terms.
>>> I suggest that we try for a category name that does not contain an
>>> internal contradiction but serves better for marketing purposes
>>> than "observer with posting privileges."  How about "participant"?
>>> That would not only serve almost as well as "member" in the resume
>>> scenario but would also have the benefit of truthfully
>>> representing the nature of one's involvement in the process.
>>> Jon
>>>    Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2003 13:34:26 -0700
>>>    From: Eduardo Gutentag <Eduardo.Gutentag@sun.com>
>>>    Cc: Jon.Bosak@sun.com, karl.best@oasis-open.org, hlockhar@bea.com,
>>>        chairs@lists.oasis-open.org
>>>    Seems like I said something that was open to misinterpretation. So,
>>>    just in case, I'd like to clarify that my comment, "What I would like
>>>    to see is for the Kavi process to follow the OASIS TC process and not
>>>    the other way around..." was not meant in any way to disparage the
>>>    participation of observers in the mailing lists. What I did mean,
>>>    though, was that I did not think it was appropriate to munge TC
>>>    participation with mailing list participation; that until very
>>>    recently there was no language separating the two, and those who
>>>    wanted to monitor the lists were invited to join the TCs, thus
>>>    potentially inflating the ranks of the quorum-busters ;). When a
>>>    chair goes to the Add a member section of the roster maintenance
>>>    page, the chair is still told that someone can be added as a member
>>>    of the TC because he/she has qualified according to the rules, which
>>>    is false, and that some ballots may allow only members with voting
>>>    privileges to vote, which is also false, because according to the
>>>    process there are no such ballots, IOW only voting members (which
>>>    is the only kind of *TC* members there are) can vote...
>>>    So it's not that I'm unhappy with the functionality of the mailing
>>>    lists; it the language and lack of differentiation between mailing
>>>    lists and TCs that make me less than happy.
>>>    Scott McGrath wrote:
>>>    > Allow me to toss out a members' perspective, one that has little 
>>> to do
>>>    > with the strictly technical components of TC participation.
>>>    >    > People derive benefits from    > 'being a member" of OASIS 
>>> TCs for a lot of different reasons.  Some such
>>>    > reasons are strictly warm and fuzzy stuff--it makes them feel 
>>> like an
>>>    > important part of the process. Further, I would wager OASIS TC
>>>    > membership is in more than a few employee performance 
>>> evaluations, goals
>>>    > etc as a measure of meeting some corporate objective.     >    > 
>>> That said, we should be careful not to marginalize or sideline those
>>>    > that can only contribute minimally and cannot commit to travel, 
>>> meeting
>>>    > attendance, concalls at 3am etc  I think Jon's point is valid, these
>>>    > members are an important part of the process and we should find 
>>> ways to
>>>    > enable that. (remembering these are dues paying members like all 
>>> others)
>>>    >    > Notwithstanding the contradictory nature of the term 
>>> non-voting member,
>>>    > I think it serves the above needs well and I think one 
>>> intuitively knows
>>>    > what these mean.  I think grouping those with some valid input with
>>>    > other non-contributing Observers is less correct than grouping all
>>>    > contributing persons as members, where only those seeking and 
>>> abiding by
>>>    > the restrictions have voting rights, quorum implications etc.
>>>    >    > Scott...
>>>    >    > -----Original Message-----
>>>    > From: jon.bosak@sun.com [mailto:jon.bosak@sun.com]    > Sent: 
>>> Tuesday, July 01, 2003 2:37 PM
>>>    > To: karl.best@oasis-open.org
>>>    > Cc: Eduardo.Gutentag@sun.com; Jon.Bosak@sun.com; hlockhar@bea.com;
>>>    > chairs@lists.oasis-open.org
>>>    > Subject: Re: [chairs] Subtleties in the OASIS TC Member 
>>> Attendance Rules
>>>    >    > I certainly don't disagree with the premise that the kavi
>>>    > interface should align with the official OASIS TC process, but I
>>>    > am finding the category that allows observers to post on occasion
>>>    > to be extremely useful from an organizational standpoint.  The
>>>    > problem, as I see it, lies in calling this category "nonvoting
>>>    > member," which from a parliamentary standpoint is a contradiction
>>>    > in terms.  The interface should be distinguishing between
>>>    > "read/write" and "read-only" observers rather than between "voting"
>>>    > and "nonvoting" members.
>>>    >    > | I'm working an fixes to Kavi to support this, but 
>>> unfortunately
>>>    > | it's not going well...
>>>    >    > Since we're starting to depend fairly heavily on the (badly 
>>> named)
>>>    > "nonvoting member" category, I'm actually glad to hear that you're
>>>    > not making rapid progress on fixing this....
>>>    >    > Jon
>>> You may leave a Technical Committee at any time by visiting 
>>> http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/chairs/members/leave_workgroup.php 

Karl F. Best
Vice President, OASIS
office  +1 978.667.5115 x206     mobile +1 978.761.1648
karl.best@oasis-open.org      http://www.oasis-open.org

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]