Re: Call for Consensus (in email) on closing out process 2019, ONE WEEK POLL closing NOV 15th

> On Nov 8, 2018, at 17:18 , Michael Champion <Michael.Champion@microsoft.com> wrote:
> 
> My responses on the questions:
> 
> #1.    " Do we have consensus to send at least the current draft...."
> 
> 0 -- I won't stand in the way if others think we've got a coherent update, but I'm not sure.  I support the idea to expand the AB, but not sure we have the details nailed down, and I'm not at all sure I like the implication that it lowers the approval threshold even further, so I'm not enthusiastic about updating the process just to make this change (and the other minor ones).  I'd also like to see if the elected members of the AB have consensus on fantasai's proposal for elected chairs and if so get that in Process 2019, that  would increase my sense that this is a batch of changes worth making

I don’t understand what you’re saying here.  This change simply softens the enlargement of the AB, from “must be 11” to “between 9 and 11” and rolls forward our existing practices in terms of how many seats are open for seating, which ones are filled, and so on. It doesn’t change the voting system, approval thresholds, selection of chairs, or anything like that. It just means we don’t panic if we can’t always find that number of candidates.



David Singer
Manager, Software Standards, Apple Inc.

Received on Friday, 9 November 2018 16:45:34 UTC