[cabf_governance] Bylaws WG Charter

[Ryan Sleevi]

As a scoping mechanism, do you have a concrete set of concerns that could
be identified and scoped, and the evaluation of continuation of a CWG be
based on whether to recharter or shutter?

This seems very unlike the FIWG, in that there's risk - to all members - by
an unbounded set of proposed changes to the bylaws. It seems this is
something we want very concrete problem statements as it applies to the
Forum, as a number of the issues we've been discussing are applicable not
at the Forum level, but resulting from the SCWG charter situation.

On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 1:28 PM Ben Wilson <ben.wilson at digicert.com> wrote:

> Yes – all real voting would happen at the Forum level.
>
>
>
> The purpose is that we don’t have any other good structure recognized in
> the bylaws for this type of side activity.  That’s why we created the
> Infrastructure Working Group, upon which this ballot was based.
>
>
>
> *From:* Ryan Sleevi <sleevi at google.com>
> *Sent:* Friday, September 14, 2018 11:26 AM
> *To:* Ben Wilson <ben.wilson at digicert.com>; CA/Browser Forum Governance
> WG List <govreform at cabforum.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [cabf_governance] Bylaws WG Charter
>
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 12:46 PM Ben Wilson via Govreform <
> govreform at cabforum.org> wrote:
>
> See the proposal below:
>
>
>
> *Ballot FORUM-__: Establish Bylaws Working Group*
>
>
>
> *Purpose of Ballot*
>
> The CA/Browser Forum is engaged in an ongoing process to update and revise
> its bylaws.  This work is expected to continue indefinitely as a necessary
> aspect of any living organization.  This ballot would establish a working
> group chartered to help ensure that the Bylaws continue to meet the needs
> of the Forum, its Members, and Interested Parties.
>
>
>
> The following motion has been proposed by Ben Wilson of DigiCert and
> endorsed by _____  of _____ and _____ of  ______.
>
>
>
> *— MOTION BEGINS —*
>
>
>
> *Establish Bylaws Working Group*
>
>
>
> Upon approval of the CAB Forum by ballot in accordance with section 5.3 of
> the Bylaws, the Bylaws Working Group (“BWG”) is created to perform the
> activities as specified in this Charter, subject to the terms and
> conditions of the CA/Browser Forum Bylaws and Intellectual Property Rights
> (IPR) Policy, as such documents may change from time to time. The
> definitions found in the Forum’s Bylaws shall apply to capitalized terms in
> this Charter.
>
>
>
> *Scope*
>
> The authorized scope of the Bylaws Working Group shall be to draft,
> discuss, evaluate, recommend and present—to the Forum at large—proposals
> and ballots to amend to the Bylaws.
>
>
>
> *Out of Scope*
>
> The following items are considered out of scope for the Working Group
> under this charter:
>
>    - The BWG shall not create Final Guidelines or Final Maintenance
>    Guidelines as defined in the Bylaws and IPR Policy.
>    - The BWG shall not impose other requirements upon the rest of the
>    Forum.
>
>
>
> *Anticipated End Date*
>
> Given that a current and well-worded set of bylaws is vital to any active
> organization,  the BWG is chartered without a specific end date. However,
> the BWG may be dissolved at any time through a Forum ballot, as specified
> in the Bylaws, section 5.3.2c.
>
>
>
> *Personnel and Participation*
>
> *Initial Chairs and Contacts         *
>
> The proposer of the ballot, Ben Wilson, will act as chair of the BWG until
> the first Working Group Teleconference, at which time the group will select
> a chair and vice-chair either through election or acclamation of those
> present. The chair and vice-chair will serve two-year terms, the first of
> which will start upon their election and run through 31 October 2020.
>
>
>
> *Members Eligible to Participate*
>
> The BWG welcomes the participation of any Member organization of the Forum
> Plenary interested in this work, and also invites Interested Parties and
> Associate Members as defined in the Bylaws to participate in its meetings
> and work.  Membership or participation in the BWG does not alone qualify a
> participant for Forum membership.
>
>
>
> *Membership Declaration*
>
> Member organizations of the Forum that choose to participate in the BWG
> may declare their participation and must do so prior to participating, in
> accordance with the IPR agreements of the Forum. The Chair of the BWG shall
> establish a list for declarations of participation and manage it in
> accordance with the Bylaws and the IPR requirements documents.
>
>
>
> *Voting and Voting Structure*
>
> Voting shall not be conducted pursuant to Section 2.3 of the Bylaws, but
> shall be informal with a desire that they be consensus-based. Where broad
> consensus cannot be reached, then recommendations to the Forum at large
> shall be made by simple majority and voting shall be egalitarian based on
> voting membership in the Forum, and all Members shall vote together as a
> single class, with one vote granted to each Member organization. Decisions
> of the BWG shall be adopted if the number of votes cast meets Quorum, and
> the number of votes in favor exceeds 50% of the votes cast. Quorum is
> defined as the larger of 3 or the average number of Member organizations
> that have participated in the last three BWG Meetings or Teleconferences
> (not counting subcommittee meetings thereof). For transition purposes, if
> three meetings have not yet occurred, quorum is three (3).
>
>
>
> Just to make sure I understand the proposed scope - it's the formation of
> a WG that uses egalitarian/consensus voting to propose ballots to the Forum
> at large, which will then need to re-propose and re-endorse these ballots,
> to then vote according to the Bylaws process.
>
>
>
> Is that correct?
>
>
>
> What's the objective of establishing a WG for this as opposed to keeping
> it on the Forum calls?
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://cabforum.org/pipermail/govreform/attachments/20180914/5b10badf/attachment.html>