Re: first batch of corrections

[Albert Cheng <acheng@ncsa.uiuc.edu>]

I think Dick has a good point there.  On the other hand,
it is not clear yet how the voting procedure runs.  With list
members all around the world, we have substantial time differences.
We can't tell if a member is not voting or has not read the voting
mail or his/her vote is lost somehow.  So, will each voting be open
until everyone has voted or will it be open for a period of time,
say 48 hours?  For practical purpose, it probably will be the latter
(a period of time) than the former (wait till all has voted).

Say, it is 48 hours for first vote, 1 day to tally and announce the result
of the first vote.  1 day for people to comment more.  Then another 48 hours
for the second vote.

If the above example is reasonably valid, just the two votes would take
6 days.  Adding a week or 5 days of discussion, that is roughly 2 weeks.
Would that cover people who may be absent for a week?

The above also assumes the second votes follows immediately.  If the
second vote is always at least a week from the first one, that would
cover an even longer period of potential absence.

-Albert

At 02:09 PM 5/6/01 -0400, Richard Treumann wrote:

>Rusty -
>
>I am glad to see this get going and certainly do not wish to slow it down.
>However - I do not think one week from raising an issue to voting it is
>long enough.  Business trips and vacations often last a week and somebody
>could easily miss an important discussion.  I suggest a two week minimum
>cycle.  Two week and longer vacations are not unheard of but I think going
>past two weeks as minimum is too much.
>
>               Regards -  Dick
>
>Dick Treumann                RS/6000 SP Development
>IBM Poughkeepsie Unix Development Lab
>Dept 0lva / MS P963 -- 2455 South Road -- Poughkeepsie, NY 12601
>Tele (845) 433-7846         Fax (845) 433-8363

-- 
Albert Cheng
Scientific Data Technologies Group, NCSA              217-244-1955 voice
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign            217-244-1987 fax