[cabfpub] Endorsement Changes

[Kirk Hall]

Jos – my belief has always been that the proposer can’t/shouldn’t make changes to a ballot during the discussion period without the approval of the endorsers, and if the proposer doesn’t get approval, an endorser can and should object during the discussion period and can withdraw its endorsement (stopping the ballot).  I’m not sure it’s necessary for a proposer to publicly say “I agree with this edit” – instead, we can assume agreement unless the endorser objects on the list.

Once the voting period starts, my belief has been that neither the proposer nor the endorsers can stop the ballot (if there’s a problem, I guess they can encourage members to vote no).

That’s just my opinion of how our current Bylaws work.  I suppose the next time we modify the Bylaws around voting, we can consider adding provisions.

From: Public [mailto:public-bounces at cabforum.org] On Behalf Of Jos Purvis (jopurvis) via Public
Sent: Friday, December 15, 2017 8:58 AM
To: CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List <public at cabforum.org>
Subject: [EXTERNAL][cabfpub] Endorsement Changes

While reviewing ballot 216, we noticed that there doesn't appear to be any verbiage in the Bylaws describing an endorser's right to remove (or requirement to review/reaffirm) their endorsement of a particular ballot. That is, if the ballot is changed significantly during the discussion period, there doesn't appear to be a requirement for the endorsers to re-affirm their understanding and endorsement of the new ballot language. Some of that would be personal responsibility: one would expect anyone who endorses a ballot to be keeping up with the discussions and withdraw their endorsement of the ballot if they disagree with the final version. The language around endorsement, though, appears not to require such a re-affirmation after changes. It seems like that could potentially open the door to ballot disputes or problems starting the voting period if the final post of the ballot before starting the vote included (or didn't include!) changes problematic to the endorsers.

Did we miss finding the verbiage around an endorser withdrawing endorsement of a ballot? If not, would it make sense to firm up the language and practice around endorsements, perhaps by requiring the endorsers to re-affirm their final endorsement prior to starting the voting period?

                -- Jos

--
Jos Purvis (jopurvis at cisco.com<mailto:jopurvis at cisco.com>)
.:|:.:|:. cisco systems  | Cryptographic Services
PGP: 0xFD802FEE07D19105  | +1 919.991.9114 (desk)

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20171217/476c61e1/attachment.html>