Thread Links Date Links
Thread Prev Thread Next Thread Index Date Prev Date Next Date Index

Re: SUO: On the subject of taking votes




In face-to-face meetings on can easily get a feeling
for how much of a consensus a particular choice may have.
In this discussion group, where only a few comment
on any given issue, it is much more of a guessing game.
If "vote" is a no-no than can anyone suggest how I can
get a "sense of the committee" on a specific issue,
such as whether we would want a "spatialLocation"
to be a "required" or "optional" relation?

    Pat
==================

Robert Spillers wrote:
> 
> On the subject of taking votes - having had some experience
> participating in goal oriented public/professional organizations,  I
> find it unwise to take votes when the outcome is not reasonably
> predictable.  It causes people to argue their positions differently and
> to harden whatever divisiveness already existed.  Unless the question is
> trivial (when to return from lunch in face to face meetings, etc.) or
> absolutely necessary,  one should not call for a vote unless there is
> reasonable expectation of a large majority. A close vote is usually much
> worse than not taking a vote.
> 
> Standards organizations require consensus,  usually in the range of a
> 75% majority.  In practice any significant opposition frequently
> prevents a proposed standard from being accepted.  There are of course
> exceptions, but a "standard" normally is intended to mean something that
> is (or will be) very widely accepted - not just the best technical
> effort of the group, however diligent they may be.
> 
> In this Working Group we have had several votes that I regard as
> unnecessary and divisive.  Several years ago I proposed that instead of
> having votes on candidates for starter documents, that we accept any
> documents offered, without a vote and without any having a privileged
> position.  Those documents that people felt were worthwhile would
> attract volunteers and progress. Less attractive documents would be
> ignored.  When a large majority seems to develop,  a vote should be held
> to confirm a consensus.
> 
> If most members felt confidence in the chair's fairness and
> impartiality, many  actions could be taken by unanimous consent.
> Unfortunately that is not the case - and yes, I am skeptical about this
> group's ability to produce a standard.
> 
> Bob
> 
> 
> 


-- 
=============================================
Patrick Cassidy

MICRA, Inc.                      || (908) 561-3416
735 Belvidere Ave.               || (908) 668-5252 (if no answer)
Plainfield, NJ 07062-2054        || (908) 668-5904 (fax)
				
internet:   cassidy@micra.com
=============================================