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

Why not just allow an idefinite length of time for "Prospective 
Member" or "Observer" status? That avoids the question altogether. 
However, since most TCs allow any OASIS member to subscribe to the 
private TC mailing list, I'm not quite sure why the non-voting member 
status ever came up in the first place. I must have missed that.

However, participant is okay by me, too.


At 10:58 AM -0700 7/2/03, 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.
>    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 

Rex Brooks
GeoAddress: 1361-A Addison, Berkeley, CA, 94702 USA, Earth
W3Address: http://www.starbourne.com
Email: rexb@starbourne.com
Tel: 510-849-2309
Fax: By Request

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