010. Voting membership in a committee

[Jon Bosak <bosak@boethius.eng.sun.com>]

Committees as defined in ordinary parliamentary practice (such as what
we've inherited through the OASIS Bylaws) rely on quorum requirements
to ensure that a meaningful number of members participate in
decision-making.  In groups that perform most of their business by
correspondence, the same purpose can be accomplished by a requirement
that no action can be taken without the vote of a majority of the whole
membership.

A hidden but highly significant assumption of this principle is that
the members of the committee have all been selected by someone for
their qualities, among which is a commitment to participate actively.
Whether accomplished by ballot, by appointment of the chair, or by
appointment of the board, this top-down model of member selection can
screen out people who don't look like energetic participants and can
remove deadwood after a committee has been formed.

In a model that allows people to join committees on their own
initiative, however, experience has shown that feckless "participants"
who don't bother to vote can cause a chronic inability to achieve a
quorum and thus render the committee unable to function.

For this reason, many standards bodies employ the concept of "voting
membership" or "membership in good standing," which is a special
status that members can achieve only through active participation and
that is automatically lost if their commitment flags.

A harsh but effective criterion for active participation is the
attendance of members at face-to-face meetings.  Here, for example, is
the rule used by NCITS (which provides the American National Body
responsible for SGML work in the U.S.):

   A prospective voting member shall attend at least two out of
   three successive meetings of NCITS. A representative shall
   attend the first of these meetings as an observer and reaffirm
   interest in the work of NCITS. Membership becomes effective
   with attendance at one of the next two successive
   meetings. Voting privileges begin with the opening of that
   meeting.

The rule used by NCITS for its subsidiary bodies is significantly
looser:

   A representative of a prospective voting member shall attend
   at least one meeting of the TC, TG, or SG. A representative
   shall attend the first of these meetings as an observer and
   reaffirm interest in the work of the TC, TG, or SG. Membership
   becomes effective after adjournment of that meeting and
   receipt by the Secretariat of applicable fees for the
   membership year, at which time voting privileges begin. For a
   new subgroup's formation meeting, all attendees shall be
   considered voting members...

The termination rules are the same at both levels:

   Voting members of NCITS and its subgroups shall be terminated
   under the following conditions:

      a) The principal and all alternate representative(s) shall
      be warned in writing upon failure of the organization to:

	 (1) attend two out of three successive meetings, in
	 which case the membership shall be terminated if not
	 represented at the next meeting; or

	 (2) return 80% of the total letter ballots
	 (non-accelerated) closing during the present calendar
	 quarter, in which case the membership shall be
	 terminated if the member fails to return at least 80% of
	 the total letter ballots (non-accelerated) closing
	 during the subsequent quarter.

      An organization fails to perform an above action when none
      of the organization's representatives perform the action.

      b) The voting membership shall be canceled by the NCITS
      Secretariat for failure to pay appropriate service fees
      within the time specified by the NCITS Secretariat.

   NCITS or its subgroups may vote to continue the membership
   despite failure of the member to comply with the membership
   criteria in item a) above.

Notice that "member" here refers (typically) to organizations, not
individuals; in other words, an organization can meet the requirements
for continuing participation in NCITS by sending alternates.

To me, the need for membership criteria in an organization that is (a)
staffed from the bottom up and (b) actually intends to get something
done is beyond question.  The questions that I have are these:

   1. Should we base our criteria on individuals or
      organizations?  (Given our attempt to involve individuals,
      I am strongly in favor of the former.)

   2. What mechanism do we use to set the basic criteria?  We
      can use attendance in person, attendance in telephone
      conferences, percentage of votes cast, or some combination
      of these.

I'm starting separate discussions of these two points under the
following subject headings:

   011. Why individuals?

   012. Criteria for voting membership

Jon