W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-w3process@w3.org > March 2015

Re: dropping the request -> Re: w3process-ACTION-47: Produce a proposal for addressing wayne's "comment 9" - allowing appeal where the director's decision isn't the same as the proposal sent for review.

From: L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org>
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2015 12:38:42 -0700
To: public-w3process@w3.org
Message-ID: <20150319193842.GA21750@pescadero.dbaron.org>
It's not clear to me if the current process allows an appeal if:

 1. a charter is sent to the AC for review
 2. some members support the charter, and some members object
 3. changes are made to resolve the objections of all the objecting
    members, leading to the withdrawal of those objections
 4. the charter is approved
 5. some of the members who supported the charter in (2) object to
    the revisions from step (3)

This doesn't seem all that far-fetched.

I think the current wording is unclear because it's not clear if,
after (3), it meets the criteria for there having been dissent, or
if there's required to be a chance for objections to the revisions
made in (3).  (I think typically such a chance is offered to AC reps
who voted in support, although not those who didn't previously
vote).

-David

-- 
𝄞   L. David Baron                         http://dbaron.org/   𝄂
𝄢   Mozilla                          https://www.mozilla.org/   𝄂
             Before I built a wall I'd ask to know
             What I was walling in or walling out,
             And to whom I was like to give offense.
               - Robert Frost, Mending Wall (1914)

Received on Thursday, 19 March 2015 19:39:07 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 19 March 2015 19:39:08 UTC