X3T9.2/90-061


April 17, 1990

Ms. Beth Stephens
Cipher/Optimem
297 N. Bernardo Avenue
Mountain View, CA 94043

Dear Beth,

I must respond to your April 12, 1990 letter which suggests that the X3T9.2 
committee discriminated against you on the basis of your gender and/or 
Optimem's size.  What happened may or may not have been unfair, but I 
seriously doubt any intentional discrimination occurred.

You point out that the AT&T membership was continued in December 1989 because 
the AT&T principal was unable to attend due to his wife's pregnancy, while 
your membership was terminated in February 1990 even though you were unable to 
attend due to your own pregnancy.  This sounds pretty damning on the surface 
if all other circumstances were equal, but they were not.

First, these two actions occurred at separate meetings, with different voters 
and, more importantly, different agendas.  As you know, the SCSI-2 public 
review period ended just prior to the February meeting.  There was a genuine 
concern that we might not have enough votes to respond to the public review 
comments with 50% of the TOTAL membership voting in favor of each motion.  
I am sure this influenced many people to vote against the Optimem membership 
continuation motion and the ACT Technology membership continuation motions.

Second, Joe Lawlor, the AT&T Principal, communicated to the committee that the 
AT&T attendance lapse was temporary and that AT&T fully expected to continue 
attending meetings after the December meeting.  However, the committee was 
informed that you expected not to return to the committee meetings before June 
1990 and possibly not even that early.

I'm sure these factors influenced the voters.  I am equally sure that your 
gender did not have an adverse impact on the voting.  Most of the committee 
members are aware of your significant contributions to the SCSI standard, 
especially your behind-the-scenes role as the SCSI-1 editor while Shugart 
Corp. was maintaining the document during the 1982-1984 period.

The committee did "discriminate" (using the positive sense of this word) on 
the Optimem membership in one regard, however.  They voted to reinstate your 
voting rights at the next meeting you attend, waving the usual requirement 
that you attend one meeting as an observer.

Best Personal Regards,


John Lohmeyer, X3T9.2 Chairman

cc: Dal Allan