OASIS Member Discuss

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) <david@drrw.info>
To: John Borras
<johnaborras@yahoo.co.uk>
Cc:
oasis-member-discuss@lists.oasis-open.org; Frederick Hirsch
<frederick.hirsch@nokia.com>
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
<johnaborras@yahoo.co.uk>
Date: Mon, October 23, 2006 11:39
am
To: Frederick Hirsch <frederick.hirsch@nokia.com>
Cc:
oasis-member-discuss@lists.oasis-open.org






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
<frederick.hirsch@nokia.com>
To: ext John Borras
<johnaborras@yahoo.co.uk>
Cc: Frederick Hirsch
<frederick.hirsch@nokia.com>;
oasis-member-discuss@lists.oasis-open.org
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 <jeff.mischkinsky@oracle.com>
> To:
chairs@lists.oasis-open.org
> 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-
>
member-discuss@lists.oasis-open.org
>
> PLEASE do not
respond on this -- the chairs
list.
>
>    thanks,
>    
jeff
> --
> Jeff
Mischkinsky                              
> jeff.mischkinsky@oracle.com
> 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 

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:david@drrw.info]
Sent: Monday, October 23, 2006 10:36 
AM
To: John Borras
Cc: 
oasis-member-discuss@lists.oasis-open.org; 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) 
  <david@drrw.info>
To: John Borras 
  <johnaborras@yahoo.co.uk>
Cc: 
  oasis-member-discuss@lists.oasis-open.org; Frederick Hirsch 
  <frederick.hirsch@nokia.com>
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 <johnaborras@yahoo.co.uk>
Date: Mon, October 23, 2006 
    11:39 am
To: Frederick Hirsch <frederick.hirsch@nokia.com>
Cc: 
    oasis-member-discuss@lists.oasis-open.org



    

    

    
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 
    <frederick.hirsch@nokia.com>
To: ext John Borras 
    <johnaborras@yahoo.co.uk>
Cc: Frederick Hirsch 
    <frederick.hirsch@nokia.com>; 
    oasis-member-discuss@lists.oasis-open.org
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 
    <jeff.mischkinsky@oracle.com>
> To: 
    chairs@lists.oasis-open.org
> 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-
> 
    member-discuss@lists.oasis-open.org
>
> PLEASE do not respond on 
    this -- the chairs 
    list.
>
>    thanks,
>     
    jeff
> --
> Jeff 
    Mischkinsky                              
> jeff.mischkinsky@oracle.com
> 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