Home > Standards Blog

Advanced Search 

Welcome to ConsortiumInfo.org
Thursday, June 22 2017 @ 09:24 AM CDT

The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
P membership status is irrelevant
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, March 05 2008 @ 02:27 AM CST
>Dario, SC34 issued an FAQ about the conduct of the BRM on Nov 15, http://www.itscj.ipsj.or.jp/sc34/open/0932.htm - check para 6.8: "If votes are taken at the BRM, who votes? >Those present."
>Paragraphs 6.5 and 6.6 (rather confusingly, for a document titled to be about the BRM) talk about O or P status remaining fixed as at the September vote, but it's in a section titled >"Voting" which seems to describe the ballot process as a whole. So for votes at the BRM, it seems P or O membership is as per September,  but as anyone at the meeting can >vote, membership status is therefore irrelevant. I think...

I can't follow your argument.
Let's us check what 6.5 really says
"6.5  What voting status will NBs have?
    For voting at the BRM, and in the ongoing DIS 29500 ballot the voting status (either “P” member or “O” member) is fixed as per the result of the 2 September letter ballot."

This FAQ entry does without doubt indicate that P and O status matter to the BRM since their status is fixed as per the 2 Sep latter ballot.

6.8 Futher explains that all attending can vote...but if O and P status matter then the only logical conclusion is that the normal directives for O and P status apply. In the september ballot both O and P participants could vote...but the rules give these votes different meaning. Going by those rules the BRM letter ballot failed.

It could happen that ISO has an extra document that makes special rules for this particular BRM, but why have this then not having been published when people question the voting rules? That no objections was heard about this at the BRM could easily be explained by the reports of the board just counting the number of objections instead of hearding them before they proceeded.

Alexander Brown probably thinks he followed procedure when he equalled O and P status...the things that matter is if the paper work match his oppinion.
[ Parent | # ]