[WG-P3] P3 Ballot - Approving Previous Notes into Minutes

Joni Brennan joni at ieee-isto.org
Thu Jun 10 11:46:50 EDT 2010

In the eGov WG the chair has literally read notes in to a quorate call such
that they could then be approved as minutes.  I'm raising that only as a
suggestion for a potential way to move forward if WG members are truly
uncomfortable with ratifying notes as the motion is crafted today.  So the
options are:

1. Vote on this motion.
2. Ask for notes to be 'read' in to minutes of a quorate call.
3. Don't take actions to ratify notes and leave them as they are.

I leave it to the group to decide which path you'd like to pursue.


On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 8:30 AM, McDowell, Brett <bmcdowell at paypal.com>wrote:

> By having those unapproved notes up on the web site we have essentially
> "read them into" our repository of records.  They do not need to be
> approved, in fact logic would lead one to say they are impossible to approve
> since WG approvals require a majority vote yet there were no majories
> present in these meetings and therefore it's impossible to approve by an
> *informed* majority of the WG.
> So whether I voted "no" or not, this ballot was likely to either (a) fail
> or (b) folks not present in those discussions would be voting in favor on
> blind faith that the records were accurate -- neither is an ideal outcome.
> They are on the wiki, and that should be enough.  Why must they get some
> stamp of approval by the full WG?
> -- Brett
> On Jun 10, 2010, at 5:04 PM, Robin Wilton wrote:
> > Hi Brett -
> >
> > I think this proposal was made on the following basis...
> >
> > 1 - the meetings in question were just discussions, and did not try to
> call for votes or make decisions...
> >
> > 2 - it was suggested (by those more familiar with the by-laws and rules
> applicable to this kind of thing) that sets of meeting notes could be "read
> into" the minutes of a subsequent meeting (provided, as above, that this was
> not a stealth means of insinuating non-quorate decisions/votes into the
> record).
> >
> > On that basis, I am comfortable voting "yes"
> >
> > R
> >
> > McDowell, Brett wrote:
> >> I'm voting "no" (see below) because notes taken in a meeting that was
> not quorate should not be recorded as approved meeting minutes in my
> opinion.  I recommend we only approve meeting minutes from meetings that
> actually happened (from an official point of view) and otherwise post
> un-approved "notes" from other informal gatherings such as a scheduled
> meeting that took place without a quorum.
> >>
> >> -- Brett
> >>
> >> On Jun 7, 2010, at 4:54 PM, Mark Lizar wrote:
> >>
> >
> _______________________________________________
> WG-P3 mailing list
> WG-P3 at kantarainitiative.org
> http://kantarainitiative.org/mailman/listinfo/wg-p3

Joni Brennan
Kantara Initiative
Managing Director
voice:+1 732-226-4223
email: joni @ ieee-isto.org
gtalk: jonibrennan
skype: upon request

Join the conversation on the community@ list -
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://kantarainitiative.org/pipermail/wg-p3/attachments/20100610/3fdf556a/attachment.html 

More information about the WG-P3 mailing list