No,
 
we don't.

In terms of the Charter need to determine whether we have Full Consensus, Consensus or enough objections to constitut No Consensus of the members appointed by the chartering AC/SOs. 

The participants do not take part in this determination and/or any related polls.

Qualifying language has the restrictive effect of excluding what is not mentioned. Hence I will only accept an unqualified requirement. 

This can go into WS2 but we then loose leverage.

el

  
-- 
Sent from Dr Lisse's iPhone 6


On Jul 30, 2015, at 23:59, Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear All
Grec ,s proposal got 11 in favour and 8 against( those voted for Keith, s proposal)
Keith,s proposal got 8 in favour and 11 against( those voted for Grec, s proposal)
My proposal got 8 in favour and 4 against
We thus need to identify the proposal that gained a more clear majority
Kavouss    


Sent from my iPhone

On 31 Jul 2015, at 07:37, Jonathan Zuck <JZuck@actonline.org> wrote:

Good question! The waters got muddy at the end. I appears as though there was a simple majority in favor of something being in there and, given that, a simple majority in favor of Greg's language. I don't know what that means for the draft that will go out to the public. There was talk of another poll on the listserv to capture more folks.

80% sure you don't need to draft anything and Greg will need to draft an inline objection on behalf of part of the CSG....but who knows?

Jonathan Zuck

[...]