[cabfpub] [EXTERNAL]Re: Draft Agenda for CABF teleconference April 27

Kirk Hall Kirk.Hall at entrustdatacard.com
Mon Apr 24 21:21:46 UTC 2017

You ask a lot of questions, and I don’t have answers right now for most of them.

The only way to determine if Ballot 194 passed or failed is to figure out whether Microsoft’s vote did or did not count as valid under our Bylaws.  Some say it did count, some say no, and we don’t have any method in our Bylaws do determine conflicts like that.

I suppose someone could file a new Ballot to vote on “Did Microsoft’s vote on Ballot 194 comply with the Bylaws?” and we could get a final vote on that, which would settle the matter about Ballot 194.  (I tried to do that informally with the Doodle poll, but some people objected to that process.)

So I think we will have to settle for “Undetermined” or similar, and move on.

From: Ryan Sleevi [mailto:sleevi at google.com]
Sent: Monday, April 24, 2017 2:07 PM
To: CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List <public at cabforum.org>
Cc: Jos Purvis (jopurvis) <jopurvis at cisco.com>; Kirk Hall <Kirk.Hall at entrustdatacard.com>
Subject: [EXTERNAL]Re: [cabfpub] Draft Agenda for CABF teleconference April 27

I thought it was concluded that Ballot 194 had failed, but if there's still ambiguity, we should resolve that post-haste.

There's some important questions that arise from your answer:
1) What happens to the IP obligations of members for such "undetermined" ballots?
2) What happens for future ballots, should the situation arise?
3) What happens if Ballot 197 fails?
4) What constitutes the legitimate start of a Review Period? That is, does the mere act of the Chair sending such formally constitute such notice? Is this true even in question of the Bylaws?

I would hope such a Ballot would provide complete guidance on such matters, by addressing Ballot 194's status, the "Review Notice", the clarifications on voting (e.g. sent, submitted, posted, delivered, via shall all be measured by this means). As this would not affect any of the documents, we could complete such a vote within 14 days.

I'm curious whether there are any other concerns that such a Ballot should try to address so that there is no ambiguity whatsoever with respect to Ballot 194's status, and which might serve as a model for the future in the determination of such ambiguity. This is similar to the readoption of our documents in Ballots 180 - 182, to attempt to resolve such ambiguities.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20170424/f2032def/attachment-0003.html>

More information about the Public mailing list