1. July 2009
doc.: IEEE /0840r0
Discussion of WG self-imposed policy to limit simultaneous letter ballots
Date:
Authors:
David Bagby, Calypso Ventures, Inc.

2. Jan 2009
doc.: IEEE /1455r0
Abstract
This is a presentation to inspire discussion, in reaction to the recent occurrence of 4 simultaneous WG letter ballots.
David Bagby, Calypso Ventures, Inc.

3. Jan 2009
doc.: IEEE /1455r0
Background
Between the January and March 2019 sessions, WG held 4 letter ballots, and there were points in time where all 4 ballots were open simultaneously. All 4 ballots closed within < 2 week period.
From “hallway discussions” it seems there is a lot of grumbling and concern about how this experience worked out for voting members.
Some of this is just grumbling. We all are busy, and found having to do our usual workload, plus the work of 4 simultaneous letter ballots was a challenge and potentially an overload.
But…
David Bagby, Calypso Ventures, Inc.

4. Jan 2009
doc.: IEEE /1455r0
Background
Worse than just grumbling, a number of comments have been of the forms:
I didn’t have time, so I just voted Yes.
I didn’t have time, so I only read a (small) part of the draft and commented on what I could. …
I don’t feel I did a good job reviewing all these drafts.
In my extremely unscientific poll, I did not get a single response like, “I had enough time, and I responded to all 4 polls with the same thoroughness I normally do on WG ballots.”
David Bagby, Calypso Ventures, Inc.

5. Jan 2009
doc.: IEEE /1455r0
Considerations
We all feel responsible for doing a good job reviewing drafts and providing productive and complete comments.
The value and purpose of Working Group letter ballots is in getting such review and commentary from the membership.
Are we really helping ourselves get our work done (and done well) by scheduling letter ballots with this level of overlap, I assume in the hope that we achieve some imagined schedule to complete the projects?
David Bagby, Calypso Ventures, Inc.

6. Jan 2009
doc.: IEEE /1455r0
Straw poll
Would you support discussion of a policy (captured in the Operations Manual) that somehow limits the number of letter ballots in a time period?
Note that this could be structured by a simple limit on the number of ballots between sessions, or a limit of simultaneous open ballots (so multiple ack-to-back recirculation ballots could happen between sessions), or perhaps other approaches. We would start by brainstorming productive and practical options.
Yes: No: Abstain:
David Bagby, Calypso Ventures, Inc.