From jwagener@amoco.com Tue Mar 22 03:42:05 1994 Received: from interlock.amoco.com by dkuug.dk with SMTP id AA10600 (5.65c8/IDA-1.4.4j for ); Tue, 22 Mar 1994 16:35:22 +0100 Received: by interlock.amoco.com id AA10685 (InterLock SMTP Gateway 1.1 for sc22wg5@dkuug.dk); Tue, 22 Mar 1994 09:35:29 -0600 Received: by interlock.amoco.com (Internal Mail Agent-3); Tue, 22 Mar 1994 09:35:29 -0600 Received: by interlock.amoco.com (Internal Mail Agent-2); Tue, 22 Mar 1994 09:35:29 -0600 Received: by interlock.amoco.com (Internal Mail Agent-1); Tue, 22 Mar 1994 09:35:29 -0600 From: jwagener@amoco.com X-Openmail-Hops: 1 Date: Tue, 22 Mar 94 09:42:05 -0600 Message-Id: Subject: IR and other stuff To: sc22wg5@dkuug.dk X-Charset: ASCII X-Char-Esc: 29 Item Subject: Message text Kudus to Miles for providing us with a round of great fun. I suppose this note would be better left unsent - that's what the politically astute would do - but I've never been so accused so I thought I'd attempt to set the record straight on a couple of points. (Actually, this is a win-win situation for me, if I don't make too many people mad, because I either succeed in clearing up a few things and letting us get on with business, or I succeed at keeping the fun going.) (Miles, am I getting the hang of British humor... er, humour, or is it humuor?) The facts: 1. The IR (and chair and VC) must be from US-domiciled organizations. (Sorry, Miles, can't accept your application.) 2. Alternates need not be from the same organization as their prinicpals. (Hank's right on this one.) 3. There's nothing to prevent an individual from joining X3J3 and acting individualistic. (Indeed, I might even be able to name a few.) On point 1, I'm shocked that Miles hasn't committed to memory page 63 of the SD-2, as have the rest of us. (Actually, I needed a bit of help from Kate McMillan at X3 headquarters to spot that particular confirming passgae.) The IR can be of any color, gender, religion, political persuasion, and, yes, even national origin and nationality. But not of a non-US organization. Now if Oxford were to move across the pond, or if Miles would perchance forsake Oxford (but not British citizenhip!) for, say, Cornell, then he could be IR. On point 2, no restriction, other than that of one-vote-per-organization on any formal vote (but that C++ professor could sway the straw votes). (Joel offered to 'fess up and set the record straight on this point, but I suggested it was my turn to stir the pot.) They'll be in danger of losing at least one valuable particpant (well, at least a hard-working one... well, at least one that comes to all the meetings... well, most meetings anyway) if they "tighten" this policy - my alternate is associated not with Amoco but with the University of Oklahoma. Point 3 is the one that's going to get me in trouble. I'll fight to the death (or at least retirement, which may be imminent and involuntary after this note) for the principle of individualism on technical committees, roughly as expressed by Loren, subject to the ballot-box-stuffing safeguards expressed by Guy. We need to do a little fancy footwork to honor both this principle and the rules, but it can be done and we're doing it. A minor case in point is announcing ballot results. X3 announces their results by organization; we announce X3J3 results by individual (see the letter ballot record, for example, X3J3/94-070). I have never announced an X3J3 vote by organization and I never will. Some X3J3 individuals might choose to focus on their organizations (e.g., occasionally we get votes along the lines of: "the IBM vote is...") and that's OK. But I'm going to continue to list the results by individual - I just have to make sure behind the scenes that the safeguard spirit is not violated. I suppose it's human nature for the parent committee culture to be projected onto the subcommittees. We just have to reject that culture (while adhering to the rules) when it's gets in the way of doing our technical job. I believe that the X3 folks really do want us to succeed, despite appearances at times, and will listen to reason. Turning from preaching to dunning, and speaking of individuals and votes, we have two letter ballots drawing to a close - the 006 ballot and the Fortran 77 ballot. I was brought up to believe that responsible individuals.... well, you finish that one. Thanks again for the fun, Miles. Jerry