[cabf_governance] Ballot 206 comments

[Dean Coclin]

" Otherwise, there would be nothing to stop a WG setting up a closed mailing list and using it, and that would be a major step backwards for CAB Forum transparency."

A working group has to be approved by the Forum members. This is what would stop a WG from doing what you suggest.

Also, there may be legitimate reasons to have a closed mailing list. I recall when we did code signing that we were discussing items that would be of interest to people that would want to hack the system. Hence an open list was not in the best interest of the group.



-----Original Message-----
From: Govreform [mailto:govreform-bounces at cabforum.org] On Behalf Of Gervase Markham via Govreform
Sent: Wednesday, November 1, 2017 12:08 PM
To: Virginia Fournier <vfournier at apple.com>
Cc: CA/Browser Forum Governance WG List <Govreform at cabforum.org>
Subject: Re: [cabf_governance] Ballot 206 comments

On 31/10/17 22:45, Virginia Fournier wrote:
> There was no intent to make anything less transparent.  Rather, the 
> intent was to let the WGs decide their own methods of communication 
> rather than micromanaging it and telling them what they have to use.
>  Does this seem ok?  Is there some broader language that you’d be ok with?

My original proposal for this was the list of approved methods of communication. If we can't do that, then we definitely need something which says that communications methods need to be transparent.
Otherwise, there would be nothing to stop a WG setting up a closed mailing list and using it, and that would be a major step backwards for CAB Forum transparency.

Can you suggest a way that we can ensure that communications methods are open and transparent, without micromanaging?

Gerv
_______________________________________________
Govreform mailing list
Govreform at cabforum.org
https://clicktime.symantec.com/a/1/ENWLjXPjifnADu92Ovu37HOzKafJENTl1MzZQSzk-_0=?d=hDBXz_jtc2dxd4ZYKSsU590fZqWTx8y9HnNC1B-sFEq1OEQQmBLlFJZf2eCin88qJcZqXO5FIdA_nCRvY_vlPtw32BgPq-E3MYMhnrTnOXCHAhW6An0P7UalMJfa0bvp0dtBQfQCaNf84YeiLF_KudHE7JacHyQRIivcmh27acEdpILO_fdBN-cPDrNzfBKI3wjeZk7cxap3WBjWxrQWvGcPW1X-KqUoFWp42UhMr5J6VA_XzC8_JAhEse7o3_bl1B9Xm58xtG-P6Y8YhT0P21QV140tsf_Xb7B1CfQqP3jBbDgbFrhKB-M8NepIzgyugLAgHdx9e-kSiciUgCXPyIprwqcuh581BlJhSp9EfP0z_4Lij7zZffrELXa3IfeO3aIH009lZDqkeicRd4pe&u=https%3A%2F%2Fcabforum.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fgovreform