+1. The current voting rules are working
very well for the XRI and XDI TCs and encourage participation; I wouldn’t
want to do anything to discourage this.
=Drummond
http://xri.net/=drummond.reed
From: Breininger,
Kathryn R [mailto:]
Sent: Monday, October 23, 2006
11:51 AM
To: David RR Webber (XML); John
Borras
Cc:
; Frederick Hirsch
Subject: RE:
[oasis-member-discuss] Fw: [chairs] Possible change to TC voting rules - input
requested
I agree. Are there one or two TCs that
have this potential problem of weighting the voting and work of the TC to one
dominate organization? If so, work with those TCs to right the issue,
emphasizing the need for broad representation and not wanting to have the
appearance of a one dominate organization, rather than change the rules, which
are working fine for 98% of the TCs (just taking a guess at the percent - I
have no idea how many might be in that situation).
Kathryn Breininger
Boeing Library Services
425-965-0182 phone
From: David RR
Webber (XML) [mailto:]
Sent: Monday, October 23, 2006
10:36 AM
To: John Borras
Cc:
; Frederick Hirsch
Subject: RE:
[oasis-member-discuss] Fw: [chairs] Possible change to TC voting rules - input
requested
John,
That's a good question.
Perhaps OASIS has some specific TC's in mind where the mix of
participation seems to be somewhat unbalanced?
But again - this seems to be something - if they are aware of concern -
they could easily address directly with the party/ies concerned - and work out
some mutual agreement with the TC chair?
Thanks, DW
-------- Original Message --------
If your last para is true then where's the whole concern
underlying this question come from?
Regards
John
M. +44 (0)7976 157745
----- Original Message
----
From: David RR Webber (XML) <>
To: John Borras <>
Cc: ; Frederick Hirsch
<>
Sent: Monday, 23 October, 2006 4:59:06 PM
Subject: RE: [oasis-member-discuss] Fw: [chairs] Possible change to TC voting
rules - input requested
John,
I'm inclined to say this whole question is moot.
Even the most resource flush companies - find it hard to justify having
more than 3 or 4 people on the same committee!
In practice budget and project resource issues, deadlines and
deliverables are the biggest restriction here.
Unless someone can really show where this has been consistently abused
- I personally cannot remember any company (even the really big ones) having
more than about 3 or 4 people on a committee for an extended period of
time. They quickly remove the non-essential persons and re-assign them.
If the BOD did find that an OASIS TC had been
"stacked" - they have an opportunity to refer the standard
approval back before it becomes finally approved - and ask for input from more
members / contributors - and / or OASIS voting members themselves can also
decide not to approve the specification if they feel its not representative
enough.
DW
-------- Original Message
--------
Subject: Re: [oasis-member-discuss] Fw: [chairs] Possible change to TC
voting rules - input requested
From: John Borras <>
Date: Mon, October 23, 2006 11:39 am
To: Frederick Hirsch <>
Cc:
Hi Frederick.
My thinking was if there are currently say 5 people from the
same organisation on a TC and they all can vote them they will probably
all contribute fully. Restricting that org to one vote might mean 2, 3 or
4 of them might become inactive thus reducing participation. If the org
was restricted to say max 3 members who can all vote then there's a strong
chance you would keep a higher level of active participation from that
org. All ifs and buts and maybes I appreciate but possibly IMHO a
better chance of keeping good participation.
Clearer?
Regards
John
M. +44 (0)7976 157745
----- Original Message
----
From: Frederick Hirsch <>
To: ext John Borras <>
Cc: Frederick Hirsch <>;
Sent: Monday, 23 October, 2006 4:08:28 PM
Subject: Re: [oasis-member-discuss] Fw: [chairs] Possible change to TC voting
rules - input requested
John
Thanks for your note.
Is not restricting participation level more restrictive than
restricting voting, and more likely to potentially reduce involvement?
I'm not quite sure how this suggestion addresses your concern about
reducing participation.
Perhaps I misunderstood your comment, hence my reply.
regards, Frederick
Frederick Hirsch
Nokia
On Oct 23, 2006, at 4:01 AM, ext John Borras wrote:
> This is a difficult one and I can see the arguments on both
sides.
> My main concern would be the effct that reducing voting power
would
> have on participation. That's often hard enough as it
is. So on
> balance I would say leave things as they are.
>
> Perhaps the way to stop large organisations dominating TCs and
> votes would be to restrict the number of active members, and
hence
> votes, they can have on a TC? This would have the added effect
of
> them not dominating the debates within TCs which can be equally
a
> problem as dominating voting.
>
> Regards
> John
> M. +44 (0)7976 157745
>
>
> ----- Forwarded Message ----
> From: Jeff Mischkinsky <>
> To:
> Sent: Friday, 20 October, 2006 11:21:06 PM
> Subject: [chairs] Possible change to TC voting rules - input requested
>
> Dear Chairs,
> Please look at the following message about a
possible change to
> TC voting rules:
>
> http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/oasis-member-discuss/
> email/archives/200610/msg00000.html
>
> and if you are so inclined please respond as
requested to oasis-
>
>
> PLEASE do not respond on this -- the chairs list.
>
> thanks,
> jeff
> --
> Jeff
Mischkinsky
>
> Director, Web Services
Standards +1(650)506-1975
> Consulting Member Technical
Staff 500 Oracle Parkway,
M/S
> 4OP9
> Oracle
> Redwood Shores, CA 94065
>
>
> All New Yahoo! Mail – Tired of Vi@gr@! come-ons? Let our
SpamGuard
> protect you.
Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
All
new Yahoo! Mail "The new Interface is stunning in its simplicity and
ease of use." - PC Magazine
