RE: Statements to the Press (fwd)

From: Brophy, Dennis (dennisb@model.com)
Date: Thu Sep 04 2003 - 07:42:42 PDT

  • Next message: Alec Stanculescu: "Re: EETimes article "Verilog schism looms""

    Precedence: bulk

    Mac,

      In light of your public comments regarding the donation period ending on 25 August 2003 for 1364-2005 and the email from Cliff yesterday to authenticate this date as being a VSG position, I think you need to explain to the VSG your recent comments to the press. (See: http://www.eedesign.com/story/OEG20030904S0017) Your statement of fact was a half truth as you will note from the message that both I and Shalom sent to Cliff on what the approved VSG position is.

      The lack of an approved VSG deadline and a VSG approved user information collection process to consider further donations afterwards runs counter the position you assert. In fact, when you floated the idea of a press announcement at the last VSG meeting I don't think it met with approval and you suspended discussion. Now the question is, did I miss a meeting where that discussion resumed? If not, then I don't think you had reached a consensus position from which to speak.

      Since your comments fall short of what the VSG has authorized and may well not represent consensus, I suggest you to re-read your own words on VSG public statements:

                  "When the IEEE 1364 Working Group indeed expresses
                   an opinion to the Press, it will be an opinion that
                   is formulated using the consensus process that we
                   are required to use for everything else we do."

      If you want others to live by those words, you should as well.

      On a side note, the referenced site for 1364-2005 in the EE-Times article is a Verisity site. The "privacy notice" there that states Verisity *will* collect information from visits to that site and the link to the Verisity home page is outrageous in the extreme. Has the 1364-2005 website become the information and data collection site for Verisity? My suggestion is to move to an independent site immediately.

    Regards,

    Dennis
    VSG Member

    -----Original Message-----
    From: Shalom.Bresticker@motorola.com
    [mailto:Shalom.Bresticker@motorola.com]
    Sent: Saturday, April 12, 2003 1:47 PM
    To: 1364@accellera.org
    Subject: Statements to the Press (fwd)

    Resend. 

    -- 
Shalom Bresticker                           Shalom.Bresticker@motorola.com
Design & Reuse Methodology                             Tel: +972 9 9522268
Motorola Semiconductor Israel, Ltd.                    Fax: +972 9 9522890
POB 2208, Herzlia 46120, ISRAEL                       Cell: +972 50 441478

    ---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2003 23:10:46 -0700
From: Michael McNamara <mac@verisity.com>
To: 1364@eda.org, etf@boyd.com, ptf@boyd.com, btf@boyd.com
Cc: accellera_bod@accellera.org, sv-cc@eda.org, sv-bc@eda.org, sv-ac@eda.org
Subject: Statements to the Press

    Precedence: bulk

      We are living in exciting & scary times.  These are also fragile
  times.  In our little corner of the world a controversial area is
  the interaction of System Verilog and IEEE 1364. Ideally we can all
  come together and rally around a single Verilog Language.  Perhaps
  we cannot. I personally am working towards the former.

      Currently statements made to the Press by individuals may be quoted
  as if stating the position of Accellera, of the IEEE, of the IEEE
  1364 Working Group, or of the individual's company.

      Of course most of us play on multiple teams, I.E., have an employer,
  serve on (numerous) Accellera committees and on the IEEE 1364 Working
  Group and one or more of its Task Forces; so the score card is very
  hard for the press to follow.

      When the IEEE 1364 Working Group indeed expresses an opinion to the
  Press, it will be an opinion that is formulated using the consensus
  process that we are required to use for everything else we do.

      What I would like to ask members of the IEEE 1364 Working Group is
  the following: When expressing an opinion, please state that you are
  not speaking for the IEEE 1364 Working group, but in the opinion of
  (yourself, your employer, whomever else you have been given license
  to express the opinion of) you would like to state X Y & Z.  

      Indeed this is how I conduct my public presence, independently of on
  who's behalf I am speaking; and I recognize that even then, one will
  likely still get quoted out of context.

      It would be terrible for one to lose their job because they were
  misquoted in the Press as stating the opinion of some entity.

    -- 
Michael McNamara
IEEE 1364 Working Group Chairman
speaking for my cat

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Sep 04 2003 - 07:48:29 PDT and
    sponsored by Boyd Technology, Inc.