--On Thursday, April 13, 2006 1:18 PM -0400 "SISO-SAC: James McCall"
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> From: "James McCall" ([log in to unmask])
> *** This message was generated from SISO-SAC ***
> OK, it appears that at some point in our history, the SAC made the
> decision
> not to completely model our balloting process after that of the IEEE.
> Maybe
> we should consider why we might have made such a decision by looking at
> the
> potential differences between the overall processes:
> IEEE Members PAY extra to be part of a ballot pool; all SISO members are
> by
> definition part of the ballot pool. This may mean that the IEEE Members
> are
> more likely to meet their responsibilities as ballot group members and can
> be counted upon to respond appropriately.

i don't see how pool membership implies any such responsibility on
ballot group members. it is a conscious decision and action for a pool
to become a ballot group member in both SISO and IEEE.

> My observations are that it is
> sometimes hard to get the SISO members to submit their initial ballots.
> How
> much harder will it be to get them to review the changes and determine if
> their vote still stands.

can't say; but as an aside, i seem to remember something about the IEEE
non responsive ballot group members from subsequent pools.

> Is there a size difference in the average ballot group? Our SISO groups
> appear to usually be around 30 people. If IEEE groups are larger, the
> importance of a single vote is diminished and a recirculation ballot will
> not be impacted as much if a few of the YES votes do not get around to
> reviewing the changes.

IEEE ballot groups are similar in size to SISO ballot groups.

> Is a positive response really that much of a burden? All a person really
> needs to do is to vote on-line or send an e-mail. The person doesn't have
> to even review the recirculation package. The result is that the PDG has
> real numbers to justify the approval or rejection rather than just
> assuming
> that the Yes and Abstention votes still stand.

the IEEE has been at this much longer than SISO - i presume that the IEEE
was chosen to improve the ballot process and deal with ballot group member
(or lack there of).


To unsubscribe from the SISO-SAC list, click the following link: