[cabfpub] Discussion Period to End/Voting to Begin on Ballot 219 v2: Clarify handling of CAA Record Sets with no "issue"/"issuewild" property tag

[Gervase Markham]

Hi all,

In a very rare intervention, as architect of these changes to the
Bylaws, I would say that the point of them is that we no longer need
"pre-ballots" (unless perhaps the proposer does not yet have two
endorsers and so also does not have a ballot number) and also no longer
define the length of "discussion periods" up front. The way I
anticipated it working was:

* Proposer posts ballot, with number and two endorsers.

* People discuss as necessary, with no explicit time limit. They take
the time to craft the ballot into the right form, however long that is.

* Ballot is updated as appropriate as we go along (large or small) by
the proposer posting new versions with a distinguishing version number.

* If no new version is posted for 21 days, ballot (and ballot number)
expire. Any further effort to pass the measure means you start again.

* Otherwise, at any point when 7 days have elapsed without a new ballot
version being posted (i.e. the ballot is considered 'stable' by the
proposer) they can start the 7-day vote by posting the final ballot form
(which must be identical to the last version discussed) with a clear
notice to that effect.

* If people feel it's still under-discussed or not the way they want it
yet, they can vote No. It's up to the proposer to judge the mood of the
group as to when they call a vote.

The meta-goal was to prevent all sorts of faffing with dates and periods
for discussion.

Gerv