[JSR348-131] rule that ballot topics must be discussed at EC meetings raises issues Created: 21/Sep/11  Updated: 22/Sep/11  Resolved: 22/Sep/11

Status: Closed
Project: jsr348
Component/s: Standing Rules
Affects Version/s: None
Fix Version/s: None

Type: Bug Priority: Major
Reporter: sean_sheedy Assignee: Unassigned
Resolution: Won't Fix Votes: 0
Labels: None
Remaining Estimate: Not Specified
Time Spent: Not Specified
Original Estimate: Not Specified


 Description   

standing rules:

122-124 - strike, since it prevents a vote to cancel an EC meeting (see 48, above). Also prevents timely votes on appeals issues that are raised soon after an EC meeting. The 14 day electronic voting period should cover discussion.

PC> I don't understand what you're saying here., but I think I disagree We conduct our business primarily via meetings, not through email. Allowing arbitrary email votes at any time would set a bad precedent.

SS> There are some matters that come up between meetings. This prevents them from being voted on. two examples: dealing with an appeal in a timely fashion. voting to cancel an EC meeting. Even without this rule there is still 14 days to discuss the matter. One can always pass a motion to table it for a meeting, but need the ability to make votes between meetings.



 Comments   
Comment by pcurran [ 21/Sep/11 ]

Discussed at the WG meeting on Sept 21. Unanimous agreement to keep the existing language.

Comment by starksm64 [ 21/Sep/11 ]

The one point I brought up today was around a slight ambiguity in line 128 of the current JCP_EC_Standing_Rules-16SEP2011-B-Clean version of the standing rules, although there is a statement in lines 122-124 requiring discussion of the motion at an EC meeting, line 128-129 seems to relax that by saying "good practice to discuss a motion at an EC meeting, or to circulate it for comment on the EC list, before requesting a vote".

I would suggest changing the ", or to circulate it for comment.." to ", and to circulate it for comment..." so there is no ability to read the section as an alternative to discussing the motion at a meeting.

Comment by pcurran [ 22/Sep/11 ]

We discussed this at the September 21 Working Group meeting and strongly agreed that allowing arbitrary votes between meetings would be a bad idea. Our primary means of doing business is via meetings, and we don't want to undermine that.

Will not fix.

Generated at Sat Jul 04 09:17:43 UTC 2015 using JIRA 6.2.3#6260-sha1:63ef1d6dac3f4f4d7db4c1effd405ba38ccdc558.