SUO: The SUMO vote passed
At 23:23 2001-09-14 -0700, Robert Grayson Spillers wrote:
>
> Frank,
> It is remarkable isn't it that one who has frequently advised that "you can always appeal" now finds that process unpalatable. ...
I still believe in the process. The process (Robert's) also accounts for people that look to be disruptive and time-wasting. This is why the *Robert's* appeals process is consistent with common sense: you don't allow someone to gratuitously appeal everything. The Robert's does not require all appeals to be accepted.
Assuming that the chair does not accept your appeal (based on Robert's), you still have the right of appeal at the parent organization, the CS SAB. Assuming that you appeal the CS SAB, I'm sure the CS SAB will properly investigate (which the IEEE Parliamentarian did not), and also frame the questions in the appropriate, more-complete context. I hope you appeal to the CS SAB and have this matter resolved. I'm sure the IEEE staff will clear up other aspects, too (e.g., abstains are non-votes and don't count in the tally; the WGs are considered assemblies from the perspective of Robert's).
My comments and opinions are all consistent with the IEEE-SA and CS SAB processes.
-FF
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Frank Farance, Farance Inc. T: +1 212 486 4700 F: +1 212 759 1605
mailto:frank@farance.com http://farance.com
Standards, products, services for the Global Information Infrastructure