Minutes of the August 20, 2003 SGB EC Conference Call

1) Recommendations on SIGs in Transition:

SIGCAPH - Multi-service. Continues to struggle, has not printed a newsletter since January 2002. The SGB EC may suggest that the SIGs mission be folded into ACM by considering th group a standing committee.

Action: Baglio will ask Vicki Hanson to provide a report at the upcoming meetings.

SIGWEB - Conference-only. Current leadership is seeking a volunteer to take over the Chair position. Even though they're a conference SIG they are still trying to put together a CD Rom to meet their newsletter obligations to the 2001 membership.

Action: Baglio will contact Vice Chair to see if the SIG will be represented.

SIGGROUP - Multi-Service. Continues to struggle, even with new leadership. Last issue printed was December 2001.

Action: Gabow will get in touch with appointed leader to find out if anyone will represent SIGGROUP at the meeting.

SIGAPP - Conference only. Just appointed new leaders.

Gabow reported that the VC will be at the meeting to provide an update on the SIG.

2) Single SIG designation

Recommendation for SGB EC endorsement to be finalized by the SGB:

Conference-only, multi-service, publication-only and electronic forum SIG designations have outlived their usefulness. The categories were originally developed as a way to handle the revenue based formula with each designation having a different allocation. That's not the case with the current formula.

The designations are making administration of the SIGs more difficult for ACM volunteer leaders and staff. The SGB EC recommends going back to a single category of SIG. To do this, all SIGs will be required to make their annual member benefits clear and meet all obligations. SIGs not meeting their obligations will be placed in transition. Those SIGs that currently have appointed leaders will continue to appoint leaders until their bylaws are modified to hold elections.

Chesnais explained that the concept of hierarchy exists with the current designations and that was never the purpose. Moving to a single SIG designation with each SIG providing a clear list of benefits will reduce this perception. The SGB EC must make a recommendation on how this is all to be implemented. SIG Bylaws must all be changed to include benefits in order for the SGB to use those as a measurement of viability. The SGB must also include a recommendation on moving back to elections for those non-multi-service SIGs that appoint.

Action: Baglio to work with Berenbaum on recommendation for single SIG designation.

3) New SIG Proposals

SIGFACT - Special Interest Group on Factory Automation - the submitted proposal was sent to the SIG Chairs for comment.

SIGSoCo - Special Interest Group on Soft Computing - the submitted proposal was sent to the SGB EC and overlapping SIG Chairs for initial comment.

Based on the comments, the SGB EC does not believe there is a compelling need for a new SIG on either of these topics. There was little enthusiasm from the chairs and no real indication of a need. There was concern that they could become immediate problems with their limited scope of activities.

Action: Baglio to send a note to leaders that submitted the SIGFACT and SIGSoCo proposals to let them know that the SGB EC was not prepared to charter their proposed SIGs at this time.

4) Other Business

SIGCHI Bylaw Change
SIGCHI did not receive enough votes to allow their bylaw changes to move ahead. A majority of those that voted did vote in favor. The SGB EC endorsed the changes for ACM EC approval.

Action: Berenbaum to request that the ACM EC approve the SIGCHI bylaw changes.

SIGCOMM Bylaw Change
SIGCOMM did not receive enough votes to allow their bylaw changes to move ahead. A majority of those that voted did vote in favor. The SGB EC endorsed the changes for ACM EC approval.

Corless reported that the current minimum allocation was a burden on the SIG and that the SIG would be financially insolvent within a three year period. The SIG is talking about a variety of fixes but those fixes all require a transition period and the SIG needs help now. Berenbaum and Chesnais indicated that the allocation task force had looked at the issue and they'll be proposing that the minimum be brought down. In addition they'll be putting together a recommendation for the SGB to change the current formula by determining the actual allocation at the close of FY'04 and using that to budget FY'06. This would be done each budgeting cycle with a guarantee that the allocation will not change year to year by more than 2%. If there is a shortfall they're considering recommending that ACM to cover it. The SIGs would pay it back by incorporating the shortfall into the next budget cycle. If there is too much collected it will be put into a reserve fund (SARF). They've still got some work to do on this before it is presented but they believe it will benefit SIGSAM.

Corless was going to pass this information onto the SIGSAM group and indicated that they'd be pleased with the recommendations. He agreed that this was a satisfactory way to bring up the allocation issues during the SGB meeting.

Action: Berenbaum and allocation task force members to continue to work on their recommendation for the SGB meeting.



  • Donna Baglio
  • Alan Berenbaum
  • Alain Chesnais
  • Rob Corless
  • Hal Gabow
  • Bruce Klein
  • Bob Walker