[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: Re: [regrep] Result of Query Ballot
Lisa,
Thank you for your note recognizing the difference between invalid and
Disapprove ballot and suggesting a process to handle invalid ballots.
Yes, I would like to re-submit the Query Proposal for a TC Ballot. With the
time that has passed, I hope all voting members have had enough time to
review the Query Proposal. If anyone has questions or need explanations,
please contact me or Len. Also, I would like to thank all voting members in
advance for taking the effort to vote or re-vote.
Regards, Dan
Metadata Management Technology and Standard
IBM DBTI for e-Business
Notes: Dan Chang/Santa Teresa/IBM@IBMUS
Internet: dtchang@us.ibm.com
VM: IBMUSM50(DTCHANG)
Phone: (408)-463-2319
Lisa Carnahan
<lisa.carnahan To: Dan Chang/Santa Teresa/IBM@IBMUS
@nist.gov> cc: regrep@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [regrep] Result of Query Ballot
10/24/01 12:47
PM
Hi Dan and TC members,
Back in June we agreed to a voting process for documents within the
TC. (The process for a TC voting to move a document to a vote by the OASIS
membership ballot is well documented by OASIS procedures.) The process we
agreed to was that (1) for a ballot to be valid (Scott H.: your word is
more appropriate than mine, the Query ballot is 'invalid' rather than 'not
approved') a simple majority of TC members who have a voting status must
vote and (2) of those voting, a simple majority must vote approve for the
proposal to be approved.
The OASIS Procedure document does state that a TC member who has not voted
in 80% of the ballots in a 90 day period are removed from the committee -
so there is a penalty for not voting.
Since we are somewhat on new territory here (I did not anticipate apathy(?)
in our votes), we must define a process that is fair for handling invalid
ballots. I propose that any proposal that results in an 'invalid' ballot
should be resubmitted to the TC (with changes or not) and re-balloted. If
we have another 'invalid' ballot....hopefully we won't cross that bridge.
To those that did not ballot the Query Proposal: are there any
comments/changes that would serve to have you vote? A few of you have
mentioned to me privately that you did not have time to read the proposal
and therefore did not feel comfortable voting. If you are given more time
in a re-ballot, will you vote? Is five days not enough time?
I share Dan's opinion that obviously, the Query Chapter has to be updated
to reflect the changes to the RIM. We must come out of the face-to-face
with these changes in place.
Dan: do you wish to re-submit the Query Proposal for a TC Ballot?
--lisa
At 09:25 AM 10/24/2001 -0700, you wrote:
>Lisa,
>
>I am very puzzled and disturbed by the process. Somehow not voting is
being
>counted as disapprove. That is, nine people did not vote/care and
therefore
>they have disapproved the Query proposal?!
>
>It will be totally wrong for V2 to be published with the existing Object
>Query Management chapter. The chapter is outdated and, therefore, wrong.
If
>the Query proposal is not approved, V2 should be published with the
chapter
>removed.
>
>I am new to the OASIS process, but I am familiar with the OMG process.
With
>the OMG process, a quorum is established not as half of all voting
members,
>but as half of all consistently-participating voting members, which
>protects active members and the process as a whole.
>
>Regards, Dan
>
>Metadata Management Technology and Standard
>IBM DBTI for e-Business
>Notes: Dan Chang/Santa Teresa/IBM@IBMUS
>Internet: dtchang@us.ibm.com
>VM: IBMUSM50(DTCHANG)
>Phone: (408)-463-2319
>
>
>
>
> Lisa
> Carnahan
>
> <lisa.carnahan To:
> regrep@lists.oasis-open.org
> @nist.gov> cc:
>
> Subject: [regrep] Result of
> Query Ballot
> 10/24/01
> 07:49
> AM
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>The Query Proposal is not approved because the number of TC members
casting
>
>a ballot was not a simple majority of TC voting members. We agreed as a
TC
>
>that a simple majority must cast ballots for the vote to be valid. We
>needed 9 ballots for the vote to be valid. The results are as follows:
>
>Bruce Bargmeyer - did not vote
>Kathryn Breininger - approve
>Dan Chang - approve
>Joe Chiusano - abstain
>Suresh Damodaran -did not vote
>Anne Fischer - approve
>Sally Fuger - did not vote
>Len Gallagher - approve
>Jong Kim - did not vote
>Joel Munter - did not vote
>Farrukh Najmi - disapprove
>Sanjay Patil - did not vote
>Neal Smith -disapprove
>Nikola Stojanovic - did not vote
>Prasad Yendluri - did not vote
>Yutaka Yoshida - did not vote
>
>If I have incorrectly represented your action, please let me know ASAP.
>
>--lisa
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------
>To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
>manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
>
>
>
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------
>To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
>manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC