Matthew,
Most standards work is done is a less suspicious environment (because
members have less reason to be suspicious). It is a part of the
chair's responsibility to encourage voting, but not just those who
might favor the result he desires - yes, this is being suspicious (or
prudent ) but there is ample reason for it.
Bob
West, Matthew R SITI-ITPSIE wrote:
Dear
Bob,
I
have to admit that I am used to a less suspicious environment. In SC4
it is not uncommon for late voters to be reminded and for late votes to
be counted, on the pragmatic basis that the alternative (at least if
the vote failed) is that the vote is called again.
We
could require that communications from the chair are sent to all voting
members, rather than to just those who have not responded, which is at
least more open to error. However, I think it is part of the function
of the Chair to encourage people to caste a vote (Yes, no, or abstain).
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
Jim,
My concern is that if the vote is close the chair may influence the
outcome by either extending the time to vote or following up
selectively with voters that he thinks may vote the way he prefers.
Setting a definite time period for a vote is long established practice
and should only be extended for technical reasons that affect the
voters ability to cast their vote - not to allow additional time to
secure a majority of eligible voters.
Bob
jim.s3@JUNO.COM
wrote:
Bob,
I understand your concerns, but I think we have them covere.
I will set a definite period for the ballot. There is no intent
to extend it, but the chair can do so if needed. Some voting members
don't subscribe to the SUO list, and others may filter it.
With these new voting rules, it is all the more important all
members receive and have the opportunity to cast a vote. If I don't
receive an acknowledgement within 1-week, I will seek to reach the member
to ensure it was received.
Jim
On Sat, 10 Apr 2004 13:03:52 -0700 Robert Spillers <skydog@PACBELL.NET>
writes:
Jim,
You should set a definite period for the responses and not extend it
-
except for major problems with the system, e.g. the server is down.
You
can send reminders as often as you like but they should go to the
suo
list and not to individual voters.
Bob
jim.s3@JUNO.COM wrote:
________________________________________________________________
The best thing to hit the Internet in years - Juno SpeedBand!
Surf the Web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!
Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today!
|