Re: [chairs] Simplified TC attendance rules

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

Guys,

(writing this with my member-of-Process-SC-hat firmly nailed to my head)

the process document says exactly what it means to say. It is not a
poem open to interpretation ;) Well, at least that's the intention of
those who wrote it. There may be bugs, of course, but that is not the
intention either. And it will not make everybody happy, but that is to
be expected. Hopefully it is the one solution that will make the least
number of people unhappy, while being workable and implementable.

Regarding the "doing nothing for 60 days". The intention here is to
provide a sort of cushion, so as to avoid a sudden influx of people
into the voting ranks of a TC. Whether a candidate for voting status does
something or not is irrelevant. If we had wanted them to do something
we would have spelled it out. All we want is for them to have to
wait a bit.

Since there is no provision for becoming a member with no intent to
becoming a Voting member, the answer to the questions relating to this
is "no". We did talk about this quite a lot, but our main goal at the
time was a quick simplification; working out the kinks of how to deal
with I-don't-want-to-ever-vote-except-when-I-do situations would not
have been conducive to that goal. We also could not come up with a
convincing use case for this and decided that if enough need was found
then we would revisit this issue. But for now, what the process says or
does not say is what rules in this matter.

Regarding effective date. As Jamie said in his announcement, "We enacted
this change on Tuesday, effective immediately upon posting, and will
post it to the [members] list and the official TC Process page shortly
after this announcement to you."

IOW, it will become effective the moment Jamie posts it. Consider it
fixing a priority 1 bug.

The mix of voting and balloting was discarded in the 15-Apr-05 process
document on purpose, as another attempt at simplifying things.

The use of "Official Ballot" in the Kavi interface is an error. It should
properly say "Specification Ballot", which is defined at the top of the
process document. IOW, if there is a ballot for deciding whether to meet
next Tuesday, it does not count towards determining voting rights status.

HTH.

On 08/11/2005 08:59 AM, Doug Bunting wrote:
 > Jamie, two clarifications please...
 >
 > On 10/08/05 20:36, James Bryce Clark wrote:
 >
 >> Voting Member
 >> After the first Meeting of a TC, a Member shall gain voting rights at
 >> the close of the second consecutive Meeting attended by the Member or
 >> 60 days after the person becomes a Member, whichever comes first.
 >
 >
 > As the above reads, a new Member becomes a Voting Member after doing
 > nothing for 60 days regardless of any standing rules in the TC. This
 > leads to interesting situations in which people would be Voting Members
 > for a span of two meetings (or two votes) two months after they join
 > without being at all active. I suspect the "60 days" portion was
 > intended to be specific to TCs that either do not meet (or vote) twice
 > during that period or have the no-meeting standing rule. Could you help
 > me understand the wording?
 >
 > Separately, I am unsure it is possible under the new rules to become a
 > Member with no intent to become a Voting Member. Recovering voting
 > rights in a no-meeting TC requires an explicit request. Does gaining
 > initial voting rights? (Perhaps not so separate after all.) For a TC
 > with meetings, can a new Member identify themselves as "Non-Voting" and
 > let Kavi and the Chair ignore their attendance?
 >
 > thanx,
 > doug
 >

-- 
Eduardo Gutentag               |         e-mail: eduardo.gutentag@Sun.COM
Corporate Standards            |         Phone:  +1 510 550 4616 (internal x31442)
Sun Microsystems Inc.          |         W3C AC Rep / W3C AB / OASIS BoD