Mark Nottingham

Yes, but that's not realising the value of using SF. Ideally we'd define the mappings for most existing schemes, falling back to that for unrecognised schemes. Julian, were you going...

Until that issue is established: :) I tend to agree with @LeaVerou - we over-rotate on affiliation limits. TimBL asked me to serve on the TAG in the early 2000's...

> florian: Interestingly, the Member agreement normatively includes the Process That doesn't necessarily mean that the Process can change the contract which is the Member Agreement. The [current agreement](https://www.w3.org/2023/01/Member-Agreement) already...

My concern is largely whether the constraints are proportional to the risks they're trying to prevent, and their impacts on the ability of individuals to serve as well as the...

Regarding Directors, see Article IV Section 2. Qualification is not just for election, it's continuing; see references to "disqualification".

@cwilso I believe that an election is required by the language in the bylaws if a Consortium Director is disqualified. I have a question out to Counsel to confirm that,...

@cwilso why do you say that?

> I DO continue to have a concern that Board affiliation changes do not prompt a re-evaluation by membership within a year, like they do on the TAG and AB....

It may be this text that's making me a bit uncomfortable: > The [Team](https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Process/Drafts/snapshots/2023-04#team) is responsible for making sure that adequate mitigations are enacted in a timely fashion ... because...

> We did not want to allow for a situation where someone objects to text having been added to a spec, then the council sustains that objection, and then nothing...