Comments on: Getting down to the nitty-gritty … Part 4 http://doyoulovems.com/archives/48 Mon, 06 Sep 2010 23:21:28 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.1 By: Do you love Microsoft? : “Yes with comments”" and “abstain” http://doyoulovems.com/archives/48#comment-99 Do you love Microsoft? : “Yes with comments”" and “abstain” Fri, 17 Aug 2007 18:42:53 +0000 http://doyoulovems.com/archives/48#comment-99 [...] by ISO, according to Alex Brown (in Comment 2), who will be the convenor of the BRM. So my earlier guess on what the JTC1 Directives meant on that point (which I repeated here) was [...] […] by ISO, according to Alex Brown (in Comment 2), who will be the convenor of the BRM. So my earlier guess on what the JTC1 Directives meant on that point (which I repeated here) was […]

]]> By: John Scholes http://doyoulovems.com/archives/48#comment-26 John Scholes Thu, 19 Jul 2007 10:58:03 +0000 http://doyoulovems.com/archives/48#comment-26 Well, I think the fact that negative voters have a *duty* to attend is a rather different point. But, as I tried to make clear, one problem with the JTC1 Directives is that they are abysmally drafted! Well, I think the fact that negative voters have a *duty* to attend is a rather different point.

But, as I tried to make clear, one problem with the JTC1 Directives is that they are abysmally drafted!

]]> By: carlos http://doyoulovems.com/archives/48#comment-25 carlos Wed, 18 Jul 2007 23:56:04 +0000 http://doyoulovems.com/archives/48#comment-25 "So the 25 P-members of SC34 are apparently entitled to attend and vote whether or not they voted during the current ballot period, but other ISO members are apparently only entitled to attend and vote at the BRM if they voted (as opposed to abstained) during the current ballot period." i would like to point that what you said, citing, "but other ISO members are apparently only entitled to attend and vote at the BRM if they voted (as opposed to abstained) during the current ballot period" doesn't match the interpretation of Alex Brown at http://adjb.net/index.php?entry=entry070714-190937 "Who Attends The BRM? ... NBs having voted negatively, whether or not a NB of the relevant SC, have a duty to delegate a representative to the ballot resolution meeting. (13.7)" “So the 25 P-members of SC34 are apparently entitled to attend and vote whether or not they voted during the current ballot period, but other ISO members are apparently only entitled to attend and vote at the BRM if they voted (as opposed to abstained) during the current ballot period.”

i would like to point that what you said, citing, “but other ISO members are apparently only entitled to attend and vote at the BRM if they voted (as opposed to abstained) during the current ballot period”

doesn’t match the interpretation of Alex Brown at http://adjb.net/index.php?entry=entry070714-190937

“Who Attends The BRM? … NBs having voted negatively, whether or not a NB of the relevant SC, have a duty to delegate a representative to the ballot resolution meeting. (13.7)”

]]>