[cabfpub] Ballot process ordering

[Kirk Hall]

Emails before the F2F are available, and so are teleconference recordings.  So if you want to do the research to find occasions when you raised these objections prior to the F2F meeting, please do.

From: Ryan Sleevi [mailto:sleevi at google.com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2016 11:29 AM
To: Kirk Hall <Kirk.Hall at entrustdatacard.com>
Cc: CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List <public at cabforum.org>
Subject: Re: [cabfpub] Ballot process ordering



On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 11:23 AM, Kirk Hall <Kirk.Hall at entrustdatacard.com<mailto:Kirk.Hall at entrustdatacard.com>> wrote:
Go back and read my message, Ryan – I asked why you never raised this point in the many emails and teleconferences before the F2F on the procedure we would follow.  And you didn’t raise these issues at the F2F either.

This is not accurate.

As to what was discussed at the F2F – the Minutes for this issue were drafted by Billy van Cannon, and are posted on the CABF wiki, but have not yet been approved for publication.  But is recommend you read Billy’s draft Minutes – they do not support your position.

Yes, they're still draft minutes.

To the point of keeping accurate minutes - and why full recordings may be desirable, in the future, to avoid such misrepresentations, recall the definition of "Contribution" in the IPR Policy:
"For a verbal contribution to be deemed a Contribution hereunder it must be memorialized within approved meeting minutes of the CAB Forum."

If a minute taker fails to accurately note a proposal, and it's not incorporated into the minutes (*either* the minutes of a WG or the Forum at large), but is incorporated into a Guideline, may not trigger any of our IP protections.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20161102/7760435a/attachment-0003.html>