Geoff and Gerv - I was going to accept Ballot 198 as proposed in the text of 
Jeremy's May 3 email that starts "The ballot is now in voting".  But I guess 
earlier versions of the ballot during the discussion period had language that 
was different from the language in the attached pdf - I see that is true for 
Jeremy's email dated April 24.

Bylaw 2.3(a) says in part "If the Draft Guideline Ballot is proposing a Final 
Maintenance Guideline, such ballot will include a redline or comparison showing 
the set of changes from the Final Guideline section(s) intended to become a 
Final Maintenance Guideline ***."  So that implies the redline version is part 
of the ballot, along with stated text in the email message containing the 
ballot.  Here, they were not the same.

So is your opinion that we should record the result of Ballot 198 as "Invalid" 
or "Failed"?  That probably makes sense, and I can withdraw the Review Notice.

What do others think about how we should mark the status of Ballot 198?

-----Original Message-----
From: Public [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Gervase Markham 
via Public
Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2017 8:17 AM
To: CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List <[email protected]>
Cc: Gervase Markham <[email protected]>
Subject: [EXTERNAL]Re: [cabfpub] Revised Notice of Review Period - Ballot 198 - 
.Onion Revisions

On 16/05/17 21:39, Geoff Keating via Public wrote:
> The ‘ballot’ is the thing that includes the ‘redline or comparison’, 
> bylaws section 2.3(a).  If it doesn’t have one of those, it’s not a 
> ballot.  So the redline is definitely part of the ballot and if 
> there’s some confusion it can be consulted to make it clear what 
> change was voted on.
> 
> In addition, the redline has to be against a specific version of the 
> guidelines.  If that wasn’t done properly, to the point where there’s 
> a question as to what the ballot means or where votes might have been 
> made based on the incorrect information, then I’d think the ballot 
> would be invalid.

I think this is the best interpretationof the bylaws.

Gerv

_______________________________________________
Public mailing list
[email protected]
https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public
_______________________________________________
Public mailing list
[email protected]
https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public

Reply via email to