Policy-Discussion

[Guillaume ROMAGNY <guillaume AT cacert.org>]

Hello Ian, Hello all,

Le 20/02/2013 04:30, Ian G a écrit :
> Software Assessment in its last telco meeting declined to take some
> new policy changes with links modifications, according to p20100306:
>
>      [...]
>
> They said that, as the Policy Officer position is not listed in the
> Officer's page, they decline to recognise the effect of the motion.
>
> [...]
>
> Still, the message is clear, Software Assessment have decided to stop
> after 3 years of success.  I want to preserve the intent of the
> motion, and I see three possibilities:
>
>    1. vote on a policy officer.
>
>    2. adjust the above words so they say Policy Team instead
>       of Officer, and add a caveat that the changes are
>       notified to policy group (our general practice anyway).
>
>    3. incorporate words into PoP to that effect.
>
> What do people think?  Prefer 1,2,3 or something else?
>

The best case scenario in my point of view is having 1+2(*)+3(*)

(*) 2: we could amend you proposal saying Policy Officer or Policy Team
3: amend to define what is the "Policy Team" like a quorum of 5% of the
policy mailing list composed presumably by members having cast a vote on
a policy motion in the last 6 months (or any better idea).

No need for apologies, you are pretty right. We need to unlock the
situation.

Best regards,

Guillaume