Audit list of CG participants from the snapshot

[elf-pavlik]

Suggested in #35 (comment)

@uvdsl @CxRes would you like to coordinate it?

Once #37 is resolved this sub-issue should be unblocked.

[mrkvon]

This issue could be reformulated to audit list of eligible voters once it's produced. Alternatively you can use #39.

[elf-pavlik]

I'm not sure how it is supposed to fit with

• Allow changes to default affiliation representative (parallel to voting) #28

Once someone starts working on it we can fine tune the title.

[mrkvon]

Sorry for the confusion, I must have been commenting to some other (related) thread. (Happened to me twice today 😅)

[CxRes]

@uvdsl @CxRes would you like to coordinate it?

No, thank you!

It is the chairs' job to follow up, if anyone raises an objection to names in the generated list.

And after the harms you have engaged in as chair (particularly towards me), I have no interest (and certainly no obligation) in assisting you in doing your job as chair.

[elf-pavlik]

And after the harms you have engaged in as chair (particularly towards me)

I don't know what are you talking about, please consider

• proposing it for CG meeting agenda and joining that meeting - someone else will chair it.
• using directly W3C ombuds service https://www.w3.org/guide/process/coc-incident-resolution-ombuds.html#ombuds

I don't think think it is in scope of ODI ombuds service given you mention as chair, which could be only in the context of CG.
If you decide not to take action to resove your issue, but repeat those accusations without giving me a chance to acnknowledge or rebuke them. I may take action myself through one of those paths.

Whatever we do let's keep this issue focused. I'm not going to mention you about elections in any other issue and there is 'unsubscribe' option provided by github so you don't have to receive further notifications.

---

It is the chairs' job to follow up, if anyone raises an objection to names in the generated list.

CG charter doesn't provide any auditing process. It was suggested by specific CG participants and this issue could track this idea. Myself I don't see it needed, I even have doubts how realistic this idea is. This issue could remain without action and I will simply close it once we publish list of eligible voters in ~2 weeks.

[CxRes]

I don't think think it is in scope of ODI ombuds service given you mention as chair, which could be only in the context of CG.
If you decide not to take action to resove your issue, but repeat those accusations without giving me a chance to acnknowledge or rebuke them. I may take action myself through one of those paths.

What you are describing is exactly what you did to me. I have already been talking to the W3C for months (given that I am an unpaid volunteer and can pursue this in the spare time of volunteering in my spare time) and I cannot help if W3C does not have adequate mechanisms in place to address my concerns (W3C ombuds service has no investigative powers).

This comment is a direct threat to my reputation and safety (and continued abuse of your position as CG co-chair)! Per https://www.w3.org/policies/code-of-conduct/#safety-versus-comfort I ask you to never directly contact me.