[cabf_governance] Ballot(s) around Voting

[Kirk Hall]

Jos, I think this is useful.  A few comments.

1.  In your first change – I’m not sure S/MIME is really needed (so far, Putin has left us alone).  However, I see you only say SHOULD, so I guess this is only a recommendation.

2.  In the Bylaws, I don’t think we have been using terms like SHOULD, SHALL, etc. – so maybe take back to lower case?  Seems like someone is SHOUTING at us.

3. In your second change, you have the language “In the event a legitimately submitted vote is not posted to the Public Mail List when the voting period expires ***”.   I’m guessing this is meant to cover a case like the recent one, where Microsoft submitted to the Public list (but Mike had not been added, so it did not display) and also to me (which I received during the voting period) – correct?

I’m wondering about the word “legitimately” – what’s it mean (arguably failure to show on the Public list makes it not legitimate).  What if we turn around and say “In the event a vote is submitted to the Public Mail List or elsewhere but is not posted to the Public Mail List when the voting period expires ***” and then the rest of your language.  That could cover a case, for example, where the vote is submitted to a Working Group list only, or to the Chair only, or to another member by mistake.  As you word it, the burden of proving the vote was actually submitted falls on the member.

From: Govreform [mailto:govreform-bounces at cabforum.org] On Behalf Of Jos Purvis (jopurvis) via Govreform
Sent: Friday, June 30, 2017 7:31 AM
To: CA/Browser Forum Governance WG List <govreform at cabforum.org>
Subject: [EXTERNAL][cabf_governance] Ballot(s) around Voting

We had some brief discussion at the face-to-face about potential ballots to help tweak the voting process. I do think we need a larger effort around changing and improving the voting process, but that’s (a) something that should wait until after the working group changes, and (b) perhaps something that each working group will need to sort for itself. So for right now, to deal with a couple bumps in the road we’ve encountered recently, I have some proposed patches. Since they’re governance-related and might (Maybe? Probably not?) affect the bylaw proposals, I thought I’d float them here first and see what people thought.

Since they’re only slightly related, I would recommend breaking them into two ballots.

Ballot 1: Voting Method Changes
Section 2.2 (b) of the Bylaws shall be revised from this:
Only one vote per Member company shall be accepted; representatives of corporate affiliates shall not vote.
To this:
Only one vote per Member company shall be accepted; representatives of corporate affiliates shall not vote. Members SHOULD subscribe all voting representatives to the Public Mail List prior to the start of the voting period for which they will submit a vote. Vote submissions SHOULD be digitally signed via S/MIME using a publicly trusted certificate to ensure the integrity of the voting process.

Section 2.2 (d) shall be revised from this:
All voting will take place via the Public Mail List. Votes not submitted to the Public Mail List will not be considered valid, and will not be counted for any purpose.
To this:
All voting will take place via the Public Mail List. Votes not submitted toposted on the public record of the Public Mail List when the voting period expires will not be considered valid, and will not be counted for any purpose. In the event a legitimately submitted vote is not posted to the Public Mail List when the voting period expires, the Member who submitted the vote may petition the Forum on the Public Mail List to have the vote counted, providing evidence of proper submission to demonstrate validity. In the event the vote would not change the outcome of the ballot, the chair MAY exercise the chair’s discretion about counting the vote and SHALL post a resolution of the matter on the Public Mail List. In the event the vote would change the outcome of the ballot and the evidence of submission indicate the vote was legitimately submitted prior to the deadline, the chair SHALL declare a new seven-day voting period on the same ballot to begin in no less than three calendar days and SHALL post an announcement about the new voting period on the Public Mail List. Evidence of legitimate vote submission SHALL include, at a minimum, email headers demonstrating successful submission of the vote prior to the deadline to the email server hosting the Public Mail List from an address subscribed to the Public Mail List at the time of submission.

Ballot 2: Red-Line Attachments to Ballots
Section 2.3 (a) of the Bylaws shall be revised to add the following:
A Draft Guideline Ballot will clearly indicate whether it is proposing a Final Guideline or a Final Maintenance Guideline. If the Draft Guideline Ballot is proposing a Final Guideline, such ballot will include the full text of the Draft Guideline intended to become a Final Guideline. If the Draft Guideline Ballot is proposing a Final Maintenance Guideline, such ballot will include a redline or comparison showing the set of changes from the Final Guideline section(s) intended to become a Final Maintenance Guideline, and need not include a copy of the full set of guidelines. Such redline or comparison shall be made against the Final Guideline section(s) as they exist at the time a ballot is proposed, and need not take into consideration other ballots that may be proposed subsequently, except as provided in Section 2.3(j) below. In the event there is a conflict between the ballot text itself and the red-line/comparison copy of the Bylaws attached to the Draft Guideline Ballot submission, the ballot text itself shall in all cases take precedence and shall be the text used for implementation should the Ballot pass. If such a conflict is discovered during the discussion or voting period of the Ballot, a new copy of the redline/comparison SHOULD be submitted to the Public Mail List to correct the issue; this correction shall not require a new ballot.



--
Jos Purvis (jopurvis at cisco.com<mailto:jopurvis at cisco.com>)
.:|:.:|:. cisco systems  | Cryptographic Services
PGP: 0xFD802FEE07D19105  | +1 919.991.9114 (desk)

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://cabforum.org/pipermail/govreform/attachments/20170701/1a767d4b/attachment-0001.html>