Tim,
As DASC Chair, I don't have a right of veto. Assuming the draft PAR is
approved by the P1076 WG, it will be forwarded to the DASC Steering
Committee for approval and submission to NesCom (the IEEE-SA committee that
approves new projects). It will be up to the DASC Steering Committee to
decide whether to approve the PAR or not. My role as DASC Chair is to
facilitate the process. As per Robert's Rules, I normally don't vote,
except to make or break a tie.
Hope this allays your concerns.
Cheers,
PA
-- Dr. Peter J. Ashenden peter@ashenden.com.au Ashenden Designs Pty. Ltd. www.ashenden.com.au PO Box 640 Ph: +61 8 8339 7532 Stirling, SA 5152 Fax: +61 8 8339 2616 Australia Mobile: +61 414 70 9106 > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-vhdl-200x@eda.org > [mailto:owner-vhdl-200x@eda.org] On Behalf Of Tim Davis > Sent: Sunday, 18 July 2004 13:39 > To: Bailey, Stephen; VHDL-200x > Subject: Re: [vhdl-200x] Call for Vote: Motion to Approve > Draft PAR Submission to DASC Ch air > > > Am I understanding this correctly? We will vote on the Peter Ashenden > amended motion (which Peter Ashenden voted against) then pass > it on to > the DASC chair for approval. Let's say we vote to accept then > pass it on > to Peter who is the DASC chair. Doesn't that mean that it will be > automatically be voted down? (Since he didn't like the J. Lewis > amendment.) Why are we wasting time with a vote if Peter has the > authority to simply discard it and likely will discard it? > > (No offense Peter but this seems a little strange to me. What > am I missing?) > > -- > Aspen Logic, Inc. > by: Tim Davis, President > > Bailey, Stephen wrote: > > >This is a call to vote on the Peter Ashenden's motion, as amended by > >Jim Lewis's motion that the WG approved, to approve a Draft revision > >PAR for submission to the DASC Chair for approval and submission to > >NESCOM. > > > > > > > > >Received on Sun Jul 18 20:54:42 2004
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sun Jul 18 2004 - 20:55:25 PDT