On Fri, Sep 7, 2018 at 12:20 PM Kirk Hall <[email protected]> wrote:
> My arguments are found here: > > > > https://cabforum.org/pipermail/public/2018-September/014069.html > > > > Ryan, you can end this discussion by saying that Google will be the > Proposer on the two ballots, Ballot Forum-5 and Ballot SC-5. Will Google > be the Proposer of the two Ballots? > I don't think we'd want to endorse the behaviour of a Chair who consistently, throughout the Chairship, endorses a position of "I'm going to do it my way so deal with it.". That's not productive or responsible chairship, and it's repeated occurrence - from Ballot 190 to present - is a good reason to appreciate a change in leadership and, hopefully, leadership styles. > Google didn’t even vote on our last ballot SC8 for SCWG Chair – I’m not > sure why you are so interested in this issue. > Why is your understanding of our interest in that ballot relevant to our interest in ensuring the Bylaws are faithfully carried out? It would seem our interest in the latter would be clear regardless.
_______________________________________________ Public mailing list [email protected] https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public
