Dimitris,
I made some comments in github about a few minor issues that I think it would be useful to resolve, but this draft is close enough to the desired final state that I’d feel comfortable endorsing it, if that removes a roadblock to it moving forward. -Tim From: Public <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Dimitris Zacharopoulos (HARICA) via Public Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2020 2:15 AM To: CABforum1 <[email protected]> Subject: [cabfpub] Ballot Forum-12: Update CA/B Forum Bylaws [Was: "Ballot Forum-XX: Update CA/B Forum Bylaws to version 2.3"] We made some progress and we're getting closer to starting the discussion period for this ballot. We're "almost" there :) I have created a pull request https://github.com/dzacharo/documents/pull/2 that contains all the changes we discussed in past meetings. We have two (final?) issues to address before proceeding: 1. Ryan suggested that we replace the term "Full Member" (new term I proposed) with "Voting Member". I support this change which makes things clearer to the readers. "Members" would be the total of "Voting Members, Associate Members and Interested Parties". 2. We added the term "Voting Representative". My suggestion was to leave "the process to designate Voting Representatives for voting members" to the individual Chartered Working Group charters to address. Google strongly feels the assignment process should be addressed and described in the Bylaws and be Forum-level consistent. I don't have strong feelings about this and would be happy to make this process Forum-wide. I would like to hear any feedback with objections or concerns regarding these two changes. Unless I hear otherwise, I will proceed with these updates on Friday April 24. Hopefully, if I get a second endorser we can start the discussion period on April 27. As promised, the discussion will remain open for at least 14 days before considering voting to begin. Thank you, Dimitris. On 2020-02-29 12:07 π.μ., Dimitris Zacharopoulos (HARICA) via Public wrote: On 2020-02-28 5:29 μ.μ., Ryan Sleevi wrote: Hi Dimitris, There's a lot of changes here, and this will take us quite a bit of time to digest. I don't know that we're necessarily supportive of the "Full Member" definition, and the implications that has. The implicit consequences of treating Interested Parties as Members of the Forum is not what was intended with the current Bylaws, as I understand it, and so it has ramifications throughout. That is, our definitions have historically been "Member, Associate Member, Interested Party" - with zero overlap. This seems to redefine things to be "Full Member, Associate Member, Interested Party", with using "Member" as the aggregate term for all three, and it's unclear why that was necessary. The concern that was documented in the Bylaws issues was that it becomes confusing when we use plural (i.e. Forum Members, WG Members). Does that include "all Members"? Does it include only "Members" (with a capital "M")? Does it include every Forum member? That's mainly the problem I tried to solve by adding the "Full Member" definition. However, if we can find an alternative approach to achieve the same goal, I would support it. However, the biggest concern remains with the approach to the Chair / Vice Chair making changes to "Informative" sections. We're tremendously appreciative of your efforts here in finding a solution, and we're trying to work through how best to propose changes that capture the intent. We're very appreciative of the explicit attempt to limit the scope in sucha manner. Thank you for that, all I did was include some language that was proposed in previous meeting. I hope it will only require a few more tweaks to become acceptable by Google. Dimitris. On Fri, Feb 28, 2020 at 6:15 AM Dimitris Zacharopoulos (HARICA) via Public <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > wrote: I just received a comment that Section 2.3 point 7 also needs to precede all occurrences of "Member" with "Full", as Interested Parties are sometimes able to participate in Forum Teleconferences, etc, and so may affect the quorum without a corresponding ability to vote. So, I updated this paragraph to: "7. A ballot result will be considered valid only when more than half of the number of currently active Full Members has participated. The number of currently active Full Members is the average number of Full Member organizations that have participated in the previous three (3) Forum Meetings and Forum Teleconferences." There is no need to circulate a new version yet. I'll wait for more feedback. Thanks, Dimitris. On 2020-02-27 8:51 μ.μ., Dimitris Zacharopoulos (HARICA) via Public wrote: Following up from the latest F2F meeting, I have prepared a ballot for a Bylaws update. I am looking for two endorsers. Thanks, Dimitris. Purpose of Ballot: The Forum has identified and discussed a number of improvements to be made to the current version of the Bylaws to improve clarity and allow the Forum to function more effectively. Most of these changes are described in the “Issues with Bylaws to be addressed <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1EtrIy3F5cPge0_M-C8J6fe72KcVI8H5Q_2S6S31ynU0> ” document. Here is a list of major changes: 1. Clarification of the use of the term “Member” so it is clear when we discuss about all Forum Members (which includes Associate Members and Interested Parties), and when we discuss about the “Full Members”. 2. Adding the term “Voting Representative” which is designated by each Member. Only votes submitted by Voting Representatives will be considered 3. Replacing of the term “Forum wiki” with the properly defined term “Member Web Site” 4. Removing references for Webmaster in the definition of “Public Web Site” since it is repeated in section 5.2 5. New Photography Policy in Exhibit D 6. Clarification of 4.1 (2) that Forum Members nominate representatives 7. Allowing informative changes to Guidelines by the Chair or Vice Chair 8. In 5.3.1 require that a Certificate Issuer is trusted in the “latest” software produced by a Certificate Consumer — MOTION BEGINS – Amendment to the Bylaws: Replace the entire text of the Bylaws of the CA/Browser Forum with the attached version (CA-Browser Forum Bylaws draft v2.3.pdf). — MOTION ENDS – A red-line is also attached (CA-Browser Forum Bylaws draft v2.3 redline.pdf). The procedure for approval of this ballot is as follows: Formal discussion period: (14+ days) Ballot Discussion Begins: March XX, 2020 19:00 UTC Ballot Discussion Ends: March XX, 2020 19:00 UTC Vote for approval (7 days) Ballot Vote Begins: TBD Ballot Vote Ends: TBD _______________________________________________ Public mailing list [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public _______________________________________________ Public mailing list [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public _______________________________________________ Public mailing list [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ Public mailing list [email protected] https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public
