Epic-cc-membership-committee-l mailing list

["Steinberg, Peter" <steinberg AT bnl.gov>]

Hi Ernst –

 

Thanks for the comments, and apologies for my slow reply – my personal take on this was that

 

1. We excluded the chair in step A to try and minimize the pressure/embarrassment to an institution, to let them fix things without alerting the full CC.  However, we would certainly see it as reasonable to let the CC chair/vicechair know, so your language seems reasonable to me.
2. I consider the spokesperson to be a person, while “management” (to me) includes the full executive board.  Again, the goal is to work things out with the smallest number of people, to minimize any sense of punishing an institution.  Only if things really aren’t working does the situation escalate to the full ePIC management and CC.

 

- Peter

 

From: Epic-cc-membership-committee-l <epic-cc-membership-committee-l-bounces AT lists.bnl.gov> on behalf of Ernst Sichtermann <epsichtermann AT lbl.gov>
Date: Tuesday, June 4, 2024 at 6:46 PM
To: epic-cc-membership-committee-l AT lists.bnl.gov <epic-cc-membership-committee-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
Cc: Bernd Surrow <surrow AT temple.edu>, Ullrich,Thomas S <ullrich AT bnl.gov>
Subject: Re: [Epic-cc-membership-committee-l] [EPIC-Collaboration] Request for input on updated ePIC membership policy

Dear Peter, Pietro, Fredi, Helen, Doug, Bedanga, Silvia, and Marzia:

First, thank you for all your work in developing a/this membership (draft-)policy.

I do want to return to a point that I have raised before, which concerns points A-D on page 3 of the policy v1.0.  The eMC is a CC committee by Charter.  As such, I consider it essential that the CC Chair(-line) is informed at steps A and B, and I prefer that this is explicitly codified in the policy.  A seemingly straightforward change to the text in point A will accomplish much/most of this, e.g. "The eMC will discuss the situation with the relevant CC member(s) and will inform the CC Chair."

Separate from this, although related, I note that point B speaks of the ePIC spokesperson and point C of ePIC management.  If the distinction here is intentional, I would be grateful for some clarification on the reasoning.  And, if it is not, please consider using the same terminology in both points.

Best, Ernst


> On May 25, 2024, at 11:54, Steinberg, Peter via Eic-projdet-collab-l <eic-projdet-collab-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:
>
> Dear ePIC Collaboration –
>
> After our presentation in the most recent CC meeting, the ePIC membership committee went back and revised the policy in response to the comments received.
>  We are pleased to distribute the new version (v1.0) in this email, along with replies to the comments received by email.
>  We are pleased to accept comments on the new draft, also by email:
>  epic-cc-membership-committee-l AT lists.bnl.gov
>  Please get feedback to us by ** June 3, 2024, 11:59pm EDT **
>  As an experiment, we have also posted the draft on zenodo, where it is possible to leave comments if you are a member of the ePIC community (it’s a “request” for approval that accepts comments).  Please contact myself or Maxim Potekhin if you wish to be added.
>  https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://zenodo.org/communities/epic/requests/d6a5941a-c95e-44df-ba11-977017e30745__;!!P4SdNyxKAPE!AsLNQWRMwFSwq5jpB-NjvIjeK403-Tg9__bRbSvXBF0U1x2kpsR3uRQODw3x2QhJHlyVjHQ8A3RQ-XfXn5BWbVRo_a4tgBHCK3bBN-ZHNlZSrjurkQ$
>  Thanks for the input so far, and we look forward to more from the collaboration!
>  - Peter & Pietro for the ePIC membership committee

> _______________________________________________
> Eic-projdet-collab-l mailing list
> Eic-projdet-collab-l AT lists.bnl.gov
> https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/eic-projdet-collab-l

--
Epic-cc-membership-committee-l mailing list
Epic-cc-membership-committee-l AT lists.bnl.gov
https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/epic-cc-membership-committee-l