RE: [office-formula] Proposal: Work ONLY electronically after initial telecomm, except when we decide otherwise

[Mary McRae <marypmcrae@gmail.com>]

Hi everyone,

  One small bit of information that keeps getting lost ... the Office-Formula group is a *subcommittee* of the OpenDocument Formula
Technical Committee. Subcommittees are really ad-hoc special-interest groups designed to get real work done in a particular area of
specialization. A subcommittee cannot take any formal actions; all voting must be done at the TC level. The purpose of the
subcommittee is to gather the requirements, do the work, and then submit to the larger Technical Committee for consideration. There
are no attendance requirements; no voting status is maintained. The SC is not required to hold a minimum number of meetings, nor
have a minimum number of members. If meetings are held, minutes must be posted.

  I hope this helps clarify.

All the best,

Mary

---------------------------------------------------
Mary P McRae
OASIS 
Manager of TC Administration
email: mary.mcrae@oasis-open.org  
web: www.oasis-open.org 
phone: 603.232.9090
cell: 603.557.7985
OASIS Symposium: The Meaning of Interoperability, 9-12 May, San Francisco http://www.oasis-open.org/events/symposium_2006/



   

> -----Original Message-----
> From: David A. Wheeler [mailto:dwheeler@dwheeler.com] 
> Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 6:12 PM
> To: office-formula@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: [office-formula] Proposal: Work ONLY electronically 
> after initial telecomm, except when we decide otherwise
> 
> One thing has become crystal-clear in our attempt to have an initial
> teleconference: teleconferencing is a TERRIBLE mechanism for 
> this group.  We cover a LOT of time zones, we have a lot of 
> VERY busy experts, and for several members English is not 
> their native language.
> For the last group, their written English is much better than 
> their spoken English; trying to use spoken English is a 
> barrier to participation, and we do NOT want to create any 
> barriers to participation.
> 
> Case in point: If we wait for a time slot when we can all 
> meet, we will NEVER meet.  Clearly, we need an alternative.
> 
> So I propose this: at the upcoming formula teleconference, we 
> should vote on this proposal:
> "As a standing rule, we agree to work electronically except 
> when we SPECIFICALLY decide otherwise."  I hope that'll pass! 
> If so, we'll start working using this mailing list, and then 
> via the mailing list we can decide on the role of the Wiki 
> and other electronic means as they become available.  We can 
> also vote when to hold another teleconference or other 
> meeting, as needed.
> 
> Below are some details about how I think this would work, 
> based on my understanding of the OASIS rules. I'll include an 
> explanation for what I think we need to do so we can comply 
> with all OASIS rules. That's important; the whole reason to 
> work with OASIS is to ensure fair treatment to all parties, 
> so while the rules may be odd sometimes, we want to work 
> WITHIN them to ensure maximum fairness.  Yes, they're a 
> little creaky sometimes, but so be it.
> 
> Here's the short version of the rules as I see them.
> Except in special cases, a vote passes if there are more 
> "yes"es than "no"es AND a quorum of more than half of the 
> voting members are participating (they can vote yes, no, or 
> abstain).  You have 7 days to respond with a vote. If you 
> stop participating, you lose voting status (which can be 
> recovered by participating again).
> 
> Does anyone have a real problem with working electronically, 
> instead of having constant teleconferences?
> 
> Clarifications appreciated.
> 
> ==========================================
> 
> I've looked over the OASIS rules, and I think we can do this, 
> even though it's a different mode of operation from the 
> OpenDocument TC itself.
> Section 2.13 (TC Voting) says: "... A motion to open an 
> electronic ballot must be made in a TC meeting unless the TC 
> has adopted a standing rule to allow this motion to be made 
> on the TC's general email list.
> When such a rule has been adopted, motions made on the mail 
> list must also be seconded and discussed on that list."
> 
> If I interpret that rule correctly, I think we MUST have a 
> kick-off meeting (via telecomm). At that telecomm I plan to 
> propose adopting a standing rule to allow motions to be made 
> and discussed on the mailing list, and for voting to happen 
> electronically.  If that passes, then we can do the rest of 
> the work electronically, because we'll have discussed and 
> passed a standing rule to allow it.
> 
> If someone wants to HAVE a teleconference, they can propose 
> it electronically (including what the teleconference would 
> cover), and then we can vote on that proposal electronically 
> like any other proposal.  That way, we can have 
> teleconferences whenever the group decides it would be 
> appropriate to do so.  But I see no need for a perpetual 
> teleconference.
> 
> My company has committed to paying for a weekly 
> teleconference for 6 months.  But that doesn't make it a good idea.
> 
> For the most part, I don't expect many formal votes.
> However, here are the rules for voting when that happens, 
> which seem simple enough: "The minimum period allowed for 
> electronic voting shall be seven calendar days; the TC may 
> specify a longer voting period for a particular electronic ballot.
> Any Specification Ballot conducted as an electronic ballot 
> must permit each voter to choose yes, no or abstain."
> In most cases, to pass you need "Simple Majority Vote", i.e., 
> #yes>#no.  Although the rules aren't as clear as they should 
> be, it seems to me that the INTENT is that you must also have 
> a quorum:
>   (#yes+#no+#abstain) > (#possible voters)/2
> 
> So why should we go all-electronic?  The main reason, in my 
> mind, is rule "2.10 TC Meetings", which says: "Meetings 
> scheduled or conducted in such a manner as to exclude the 
> participation of any Member is subject to appeal."  I think 
> this is a VERY good idea.  Yet if we tried to schedule a 
> meeting where everyone can come, we cannot have a meeting at 
> all.  Obviously this makes no sense.  But 2.10 continues:
> "Meetings may be conducted face-to-face or via telephone 
> conference or other electronic media that allow participation 
> of all Members of the TC. Meeting minutes must be recorded 
> and published to the TC's general email list and referenced 
> on the TC web page."
> Obviously, conducting work via the mailing list meets this 
> criteria; EVERYONE can participate in the mailing list, and 
> obviously anything on the mailing list is recorded and 
> published on the mailing list :-).
> 
> Some of the OASIS rules talk about "quorums" and "Voting 
> rights"; by reading the rules through, the interpretation of 
> those terms on a mailing list seems to be fairly 
> straightforward. Here's how it appears to me:
> * For a vote to pass, more than half of the members need to respond
>    (with "abstain" counting as a response)... that's a quorum.
> * If you fail to vote at all for two different vote periods
>   (a 7-day voting period), you lose voting status (voting rights);
>    to regain it need to state that you are "present"
>    for two successive votes.  I'm not really eager for anyone to lose
>    voting status; the purpose of this OASIS rule is probably 
> to prevent
>    people from holding up everything if they can't even 
> bother to "abstain".
> 
> More details than you can stand (grin) are at:
>  http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/process.php
> 
> Note IN PARTICULAR that ALL formal work of this group MUST be 
> via OASIS-controlled mechanisms.  So if we use a Wiki, it 
> MUST be OASIS' Wiki (it's MoinMoin).  I don't think OASIS has 
> an IRC server; if they don't, we CANNOT use IRC.  That's just 
> as well; we don't seem to have common time slots anyway, and 
> email is better for asynchronous communication.
> 
> I'm not an OASIS rules jockey. I'm just trying to follow the 
> OASIS rules as I can best understand them while using 
> electronic communications media as is specifically permitted 
> under the rules.
> 
> --- David A. Wheeler