[cabfpub] Fixing our voting process, again

[Gervase Markham]

On 21/09/17 01:54, Kirk Hall via Public wrote:
> Technically, the Discussion period ended at 22:00 UTC today (which was
> 3:00 pm Pacific Time).  Josh, as the Proposer of the Ballot, accepted
> Gerv and Tim’s email suggestion as to a 3-month transition period, but
> this acceptance occurred at 5:05 pm Pacific Time, two hours after the
> end of the discussion period.  Also, we don’t have specific amendment
> language to consider, only a concept.

<sigh> What an incompetent shower this makes the lot of us all look, eh
:-( Yet another ballot-related tangle for the CAB Forum to sort out.

How about we change the ballot process slightly so that there is a
discussion period of a _minimum_ of 7 days (and, to prevent submarine
ballots, you could say a maximum of 21), and that after at least 7 days
have elapsed, the proposer has to then take a positive affirmative step
to move the ballot from discussion to voting? I.e. they have to kick off
the voting period themselves?

That would have prevented this SNAFU, and any others where we find we
are desperately trying to agree a small amendment to ballot language
before the 7-day guillotine cuts in and freezes the ballot.

Anyone think this is a good idea?

Gerv