Re: Draft 2 of email to Victor on voting eligibility rule change idea

Charlie,

   I agree with your proposal below that addresses the eligibility
criterion without biasing entity votes.

   Thanks.

Charlie Dawson wrote:

> Hi Victor et al,
> 
> After yesterday's meeting, Steve Dovich and I were discussing the
> ramifications of the voting rule change on eligibility.  We both agree
> that it is not in the best interest of forming a community of
> cooperative engineers nor in DASC's best interest to allow the rules
> to disenfranchise individuals or entities from future participation
> due to the new rule change.  Therefore we would like to suggest that a
> proposal be written to modify the rules as follows:
> 
> During a meeting, an individual representing an entity would, for the
> purposes of maintaining voting rights, also be considered present.  For
> an email vote, an individual representing an entity, for the purposes of
> maintaining voting rights, would be permitted to vote 'present' as well
> as cast a vote for the entity.
> 
> I would like to get feedback on the idea before attempting to put a formal
> proposal together.  If I can get sufficient feedback prior to our next
> meeting, I will write one.  Otherwise, please put this on the agenda for
> the next DASC meeting and we can discuss it further then.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
>   -Chas


> 
-- 
	Andrew Piziali, <andy@piziali.dv.org>, +1-214-455-8577
	Skype andrew_piziali

"If you have to learn about ESL, you cannot ask for better instructors.
Individually each of the three authors can provide you with a robust
understanding of ESL.  Together they provide a formidable look at this
quite misunderstood segment of EDA." -- Gabe Moretti on the book ESL
Design and Verification, "EDA Design Line," April 24, 2007


-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.