Correct ballot template emerging stage resolutions

[jlapolla-cray]

The code of conduct resolution was missing on the ballot template.

[kmorel]

Should the enumeration (numbers) be changed to itemization (bullets)? I realize the enumeration is a bit of a hassle to update, but the numbers are helpful in conversations about the criteria.

[jlapolla-cray]

I'm happy to go back to numbers if that's what people want.

[jlapolla-cray]

I guess I should go back to numbers, just to avoid any controversy.
Asking what people want just invites arguments, and this is not important enough to argue about.

[tgamblin]

we could change them all to ones, e.g.:

1. ...
1. ... 
1. ...

which may avoid the diff noise and keep them as numbers in the rendered version of the doc -- would that work?

I am not sure how easy this is to keep up to date, as I think the numbering can be affected by what's in between, but it's worth a shot as I also do not like the O(n) update complexity.

Probably something for a separate PR.

[tgamblin]

I'm fine with this change, but I left out the COC b/c it's a requirement for all Linux Foundation projects, which I thought @jlapolla-cray wanted (per #33). It's something to check before voting, but if they make it into LF they'll have a COC so it kind of doesn't matter to me whether it's in the vote.

Feel free to merge or close :)

[jlapolla-cray]

I'm fine with this change, but I left out the COC b/c it's a requirement for all Linux Foundation projects, which I thought @jlapolla-cray wanted (per #33).

Yes, that would be great, but I thought I would get push back on that.
I created this pull request to bring the ballot template in line with the Lifecycle Policies document (which still requires a code of conduct).
If we're happy with removing the code of conduct requirement, then I'll remove it from the Lifecycle Policies document and leave the ballot template unchanged.