[Standards] ballot results

Valerie Smothers vsmothers at jhmi.edu
Mon Apr 10 13:44:42 UTC 2017


Hi, everyone. The ballot has been re-opened through April 21 at 11:55 PM EDT.

We can consider the objections on candidate members through this mailing list. I've copied the various comments into this message for your review. Please review the comments, and reply all to this note if you have further comments. If you would like to change your vote on any member (including removing or adding objections), please let me know and I will make the change on your behalf. Anyone Standards Committee Voting Member who did not vote on the candidate members previously may vote through April 21.

Addition of new standards committee members requires approval by a majority of the membership of the Standards Committee. With 31 voting members, 16 affirmative votes are required for approval.

I do have one administrative note related to the comment recommending a one-year term for new members. Our standards program operating procedures require the following review of standards committee members:

The Executive Director shall review the Standards Committee membership list annually with respect to the criteria listed in Application. Members are expected to fulfill obligations of active participation, including voting and meeting participation. Where a member is found in habitual default of these obligations, the Executive Director shall direct the matter to the Standards Committee for appropriate action, which may include termination of membership.

My hope is that this annual review process would obviate the need for a one year term. From an administrative perspective, it would be less onerous.

Comments below:

Marcia Spurgeon Comments and Objections

Affirm for one-year term with assumption that membership is reconsidered each year

Lacking evidence of impact of ties to larger organization


Kalmon Victor Comments and Objections

Affirm for one-year term with assumption that membership is reconsidered each year

Proposed contribution to MedBiquitous standards committee unclear


John Eastman Comments and Objections

Affirm for one-year term with assumption that membership is reconsidered each year

The statement of interest is vague -- it is unclear whether there is real commitment to the software development product or to standards development in general.  Waiver of the membership fee for a commercial developer seems impractical.

Lacking evidence of impact of ties to larger organization

Not clear how he plans to contribute to MedBiquitous.

Proposed contribution to MedBiquitous standards committee unclear


David Weiner Comment

Affirm for one-year term with assumption that membership is reconsidered each year


Best,
Valerie

From: Gabrielle Campbell [mailto:gcampbell at aamc.org]
Sent: Friday, March 31, 2017 12:36 PM
To: 'standards at medbiq.org' <standards at medbiq.org>
Cc: Valerie Smothers <vsmothers at jhmi.edu>
Subject: Fw: ballot results for you to send


Hello MedBiq colleagues. The results are in! The Educational Achievement spec was approved unanimously. The member suggestions, however, had comments and objections so we need to consider those.



Please see the attached results summary and explanation as well as the ballot spreadsheet. Please let Valerie Smothers know if you have any specific questions about this specifications or the process.



Kind regards,

Gabrielle Campbell

Chair, MedBiquitous Standards Committee


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://medbiq.org/pipermail/standards_medbiq.org/attachments/20170410/addf57d9/attachment.html>


More information about the Standards mailing list