Subject: Re: Please vote yes - 1364.1 ballot
From: Paul J. Menchini (mench@mench.com)
Date: Fri Jun 14 2002 - 12:02:37 PDT
All,
> I stand corrected. Thanks, Paul.
NP--it's my job! <G>
> I know that the Verilog committees reviewed and responded to all
> comments from both positive and negative ballots. I did not remember
> that the comments were sent out with the revised IEEE document. I did
> remember that any yes vote could be changed to a no vote on the second
And, of course, any no vote can similarly change to yes. But, in each
case, affirmative action by a balloter is required. If the balloter
does nothing, his previous vote stands.
> pass. One big difference this time around is that we should receive
> all comments electronically, which should make responding easier than
> it was for the Verilog Standards. For the Verilog Standards we had to
> request electronic comments from each comment submitter and in some
> cases the comment submitters either did not respond or had not kept a
> copy of the comments (we had to hand enter comments before we could
> even respond).
Yeah, that *was* a pain, but we try to make things a bit better each
time....
> I also remember some ballots being returned with what appeared to be
> comments for the sake of making a comment along with a yes vote (these
> are the comments that I was hoping to avoid).
Well, if the comment is not substantive, it can be responded to with a
statement that the BRC (ballot resolution committee) thinks it's not
substantive....
<cute>
Given that you want to avoid comments accompanying affirmative ballots,
would you like me to change my vote to "no"? I did vote "yes", but I
also had some comments. But, since I did not feel that they merited a
no vote, I also voted "yes." However, if you'd prefer....
</cute>
> One interesting side note on the electronic balloting process: I like
> balloting electronically and I like being able to download an
> electronic copy for review, but it may make sense to also send out a
> hard copy to balloters. I do not recall receiving notification of the
Cliff, what, exactly, are you proposing that a hard copy of be sent to
balloters? Remember, I now have some "pull" with the SA, and can bring
this suggestion to their attention. I think you may mean that the
ballot comments should be sent back to each commentor who made them in
hard copy form, but I'm not entirely sure....
> electronic hard copy (may have been deleted by one of my filters or by
> me accidentally) and I had to ask Bhasker about the ballot
> materials. This is not too different from public companies sending
> ballots by mail but permitting electronic balloting (yes I know there
> are some differences).
Remember, my goal as a BoG member is to ease the creation of standards.
If there's something that we can do to make it easier for the
volunteers, I'm all ears.
Paul
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Fri Jun 14 2002 - 12:08:03 PDT