[cabfpub] Peter's ballot process proposal

Gervase Markham gerv at mozilla.org
Fri Nov 18 12:23:02 UTC 2016

On 18/11/16 01:46, Virginia Fournier via Public wrote:
> The topics of discussion for the IP Task Force meeting will be:
> 1.  Moving forward with the current ballots 180-182 to validate the
> existing Guidelines; and
> 2.  Settling on a process for future ballots.
> It’s important that members view these as separate issues.  

If any members or their counsel think that the process being followed
for ballots 180-182 does not match (or cannot with confidence be said to
match) what our documents currently say, and therefore would not result
in the goal of "validating the existing Guidelines", will there be an
opportunity to make that point, with rationale? Or will such members
need to wait for the 60 days to complete and then vote No on those ballots?


More information about the Public mailing list