On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 8:49 PM, Kirk Hall via Public <public@cabforum.org>
wrote:

> I previously agreed with Wayne that an all-day VWG meeting in Herndon, VA
> on Tuesday, March 6 is a good idea – but we will have to push other WG
> meetings to later, maybe Wednesday morning.  *Does anyone object to this
> plan?*
>
>
>
> On the question of attendance (in person or by phone) by Interested
> Parties at the special VWG meeting – I have pasted in the relevant part of
> Bylaw 3.2 below.  If you had asked me what I thought it meant, I would have
> said “IPs can only come to the full Forum meetings at the invitation of the
> Chair, but they can come to Working Group meetings (teleconferences and
> face-to-face meetings) without an invitation from the Chair – it’s at their
> option.”
>

Bylaws 4.2 (Finances)
Bylaws 5.1(a)
Bylaws 5.4


> Or would it be better if we permanently adopt my interpretation above –
> that no invitation from the Chair is needed for Interested Parties to
> attend WG meetings at their own option?
>

I don't believe that interpretation is consistent with those remarks. Using
your interpretation, it would mean that WG meetings are distinct from Forum
meetings, therefore Amazon is hosting (separately) the meeting of the Forum
and the meeting of individual WGs.

This applies to both physical meetings, such as the upcoming F2F, and to
teleconferences. Similarly, I'm surprise you would advocate for such an
interpretation, given your previously expressed concerns with respects to
the IP Policy, and given the issues around reliably providing minutes for
WG meetings to the Public List (as required under 5.2(a) and supported by
the definitions on Page 13 as being unambiguously public@cabforum.org )
_______________________________________________
Public mailing list
Public@cabforum.org
https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public

Reply via email to