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

Re: SUO: RE: RE: Re: Procedures Document

Title:
Matthew,
I believe Lee Auspitz's proposed language is more specific and clear than the revision you suggest.  "If the vote is successful..." begs the issue of what is required to be successful.  Lee's proposed language requiring a "majority of those qualified to vote" leaves  little doubt.

Bob
 


West, Matthew R SITI-ITPSIE wrote:
Dear Josiah and Adam,
 
You both pointed out that there were errors as to how votes were counted following the change in voting procedures. The following text was in error from 5.3:
 
Following the result of the vote, if the majority of those voting, vote in favour, the document is recognised as a Draft Deliverable and passes to the next stage.
 
In the latest draft this reads:
 
If the vote is successful, the document is recognised as a Draft Deliverable and passes to the next stage.
 
Also from 5.4:
 
The voting is as for a Draft Deliverable. The Deliverable is passed if a majority vote "Yes" or "Yes with Comments", but in the event that there are any "no with comments" votes, the Manager should consider resolving the formal issues and resubmitting the document for a further vote.
 
has been revised to:
 
The voting is as for a Draft Deliverable. The Deliverable is passed if a majority of voting members vote "Yes" or "Yes with Comments", but in the event that there are any "no with comments" votes, the Manager should consider resolving the formal issues and resubmitting the document for a further vote.
 
I trust this is a satisfactory response to enable you to withdraw your objection. I will publish a revised version in due course.

Matthew West
Business Information Architect - Supply Chain Management
Shell Information Technology International Limited
Shell Centre, London SE1 7NA, United Kingdom

Tel: +44 20 7934 4490 Mobile: +44 7796 336538
Email: matthew.west@shell.com
Internet: http://www.shell.com
http://www.matthew-west.org.uk

-----Original Message-----
From: West, Matthew R SITI-ITPSIE
Sent: 25 March 2004 14:21
To: Josiah Lee Auspitz; jim.s3@juno.com; standard-upper-ontology@ieee.org
Subject: SUO: RE: Re: Procedures Document

Dear Josiah,
 
Thank you for pointing this out. I will make the appropriate correction.
 

Matthew West
Business Information Architect - Supply Chain Management
Shell Information Technology International Limited
Shell Centre, London SE1 7NA, United Kingdom

Tel: +44 20 7934 4490 Mobile: +44 7796 336538
Email: matthew.west@shell.com
Internet: http://www.shell.com
http://www.matthew-west.org.uk

-----Original Message-----
From: Josiah Lee Auspitz [mailto:lee@sabre.org]
Sent: 25 March 2004 13:31
To: jim.s3@juno.com; standard-upper-ontology@ieee.org
Subject: SUO: Re: Procedures Document

Objection: Unless I have misunderstood something, Section 5.4 of the Procedures Document does not conform to   the IEEE voting rules on which we have just been given in a two-minute tutorial.  I would suggest correcting "majority of those voting" to "majority of those qualified to vote". 
 
 
Josiah Lee Auspitz  email: lee@sabre.org
17 Chapel Street
Somerville, MA 02144-1901
phone: 617-628-6228, fax: -9441
resend bounced email to: josiahleeauspitz@yahoo.com
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2004 8:45 PM
Subject: SUO: Procedures Document

All,
        Are there any objections to adopting Version 1.0 D6 of the procedures document at http://suo.ieee.org/SUO/SUO-Procedures/documents.html.
        This document was developed and achieved consensus within the SUO Policies Subgroup, and has previously been posted to this full list for comments.
 
Jim Schoening