RE: Revised Question 2

[Christian Huitema <huitema@windows.microsoft.com>]

Let's point out that the only difference between A2 and G is that A2
specifies that the CB procedure must "ensure that at least one-half of
the confirming body's sitting members agree to each candidate's
confirmation." It turns out that is NOT the modus operandi of the ISOC
Board of trustees. Decisions in a face to face meeting of the Board of
Trustees are according to the following rule:

1) A certain proportion of the trustees must be present (quorum), and,
2) A majority of those who are present must approve the decision.

This is specified as a simple majority in section 10 of the by-laws: "At
all meetings of the Board, a majority of the voting members of the Board
of Trustees then in office shall constitute a quorum for the transaction
of business and the act of the majority of the Trustees present at any
meeting at which a quorum is present shall be the act of the Board." 

This is a serious difference in practice, and a reason for not including
the "majority of sitting members" text proposed in A2.

-- Christian Huitema

> -----Original Message-----
> From: RJ Atkinson [mailto:rja@extremenetworks.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2003 9:34 AM
> To: ietf-nomcom@lists.elistx.com
> Subject: Revised Question 2
> 
> 
> 	At the bottom of this note, I've attempted to list all of
> the proposed fixes for the deadlock issue in Section 4 that
> are still being actively proposed.  It is likely that I've made
> a mistake along the way, so this note just attempts to verify
> that I have the correct list of currently proposed fixes.
> 
> 	If your preferred fix is not listed below, please post
> a note to the list outlining your proposed fix.  If your
> proposal involves replacing the Section 4 text, please
> include the precise proposed new text for Section 4.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Ran
> rja@extremenetworks.com
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------------
> Alternatives still being considered:
> 
> (NUL) delete the current Section 4 text and have the document
> 	be entirely silent about how the confirming bodies
confirm/reject
> 	nominees.
> (A2) posted to the list on 21 May 2003, joint from several folks
> (G) posted to the list on 19 May 2003, from Christian Huitema
> (H) from Harald Alvestrand's note of 16 May 2003;
> 	I do not know what Harald's proposed new wording is.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
> manager: <http://lists.elistx.com/subscribe>