jeffjaffe

Thanks @mnot and @dwsinger . I see your points. I suppose David, that (back to #281) I was originally concerned about introducing the "right to object to chair appointments". I've...

To protect anonymity, I can't go too much nto specifics. But in some cases, it might not be possible for a third party to represent an objector. A Team Member...

Thanks, @chaals In terms of the WAI objections listed above, I believe that the team was able to process the formal objection while preserving anonymity. The formal objection needed to...

Today we discussed how we might address this. Something like: "There may be circumstances where an objector wants complete anonymity when raising their objection. That would be difficult given that...

Now that we have opened #618, I wonder if that is a cleaner way to address this issue.

> @jeffjaffe, with #618 resolved, do you think we are good to close? +1

Often the first WG meeting is at TPAC. We should not make it harder to get meetings scheduled at TPAC by adding additional barriers.

A useful practical definition of a "substantive" change is a change - that in the judgement of the Director - would plausibly result in reviewers changing their response to a...

Providing a link to closed #17 so we have the linkage to the earlier discussion.

@mnot I suggest we start with https://www.w3.org/community/about/ Should we open new issues with a "CG/BG label" against that existing documentation?