[cabfpub] ]RE: Ballot 194 - Effective Date of Ballot 193 Provisions is in the VOTING period (ends April 16)
sleevi at google.com
Tue Apr 18 15:03:02 UTC 2017
On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 10:43 AM, philliph at comodo.com <philliph at comodo.com>
> I try to leave questions of law to lawyers precisely because the law is
> not computer algorithm.
> It is not the bylaws at issue here, it is the interpretation of the
> bylaws, and that is not the same thing at all.
Unfortunately, you're moving the goalposts on this debate in a way that
You have failed to meaningfully address any of the numerous points that
show such an interpretation is neither valid nor consistent with the
Bylaws. Would you like to engage in this debate, or will you simply see who
can talk louder?
> Given who we are, if we want to create a completely automated etc voting
> system then we should design a protocol and write some code. The current
> situation providing a use case illustrating the need for parties to be able
> to verify their vote and know it will be counted.
> Given that we instead chose to use a listserve, the protocol equivalent of
> duct tape, I think we should expect to have to allow for machine error,
> user error and combinations thereof.
That's great that you think that. We did not, however, and thus need to
live with it. Just like we did with Ballot 77.
> Really, is this what you want to make your last stand on?
This is extremely insulting. You are attempting to ignore our Bylaws and
our process, ignore the IP protections for it, in order to favour an
interpretation that is wholly unsupported. If you're suggesting that the
CA/Browser Forum should be "ruled" by Chair fiat, then yes, it's clear that
it would be unacceptable for us to particpate further in this Forum. Our
ability to make meaningful contributions is based on the consistent
application of our Bylaws and our IP process. The fact that this is now the
second time in which the new Chair has failed to do so is an unacceptable
way of continuing to do business.
I can appreciate that the original matter was one of well-meaning, though
incorrect, intent. The fact that it has continued, with other postings on
other Ballots, and with no further engagement, makes it increasingly
difficult to believe this is anything but. If there were a matter of simply
not having the time to fulfill his duties as Chair, we have an excellent
position of Vice-Chair that is able to do so, and given the potential IP
issues, it's owed to the Forum to make that effort.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Public