Materials:

• Definition of Consensus
• Structure of Consensus Building in Communities
• 5 steps making community decisions without consensus
• Disagree and Commit Definition

Attendees:

• Rabi Abdel (Vodafone)
• Tom Van Pelt (GSMA)
• Al Morton (AT&T)
• Walter Kozlowski (Telstra)
• William Diego Maza (Orange)
• user-20f1f (Ericsson)
• Ahmed El Sawaf (stc)
• Toshiyasu Wakayama (KDDI)
• Scot Steele (AT&T)

Topics:

• Anti-Trust Policies:
  • LFN Anti-Trust Policy Notice
  • GSMA Anti-Trust Policy Notice
• Finalize voting group members - 15 min
  
  1. Proposal 1
     
     1. Officers/WSL get 1 vote Ea
     2. TSC and GSC leads get 1 vote ea
     3. WSL/TSC/GSC select up to 2 major contributors for their work stream.
        1. WSL use data and their best judgement to make selection
     4. XX Individuals as WSL/Officers, total XX Voting members
  2. Proposal 2: Open Community Vote
     1. Need to define Criteria - Git Contributors? Wiki? Other?
     2. Jim Baker & Scot Steele to work on updates.
• Review/Approval of Proposal for "Shared Diagnosis" and 2 level voting 20 Min
  • Proposal 1:
    

    1. Sub teams will build a proposal review presentation the presentations will include:

       1. defined interfaces/interactions with other community members/teams

       2. Pro's

       3. Con's

       4. do-ability of the option

       5. Expected outcomes

    2. Sub teams will drive building consensus on their proposal
    3. Proposals are reviewed in a meeting
    4. Voting group members review the community votes and comments on all of the proposals and Vote for the option they believe is best on 8/11.
    5. The Results are tabulated and announced
    6. The FMO Work stream develops a transition plan by mid September.
  • Proposal 2:
    
    • Current options are distributed via Mailing list
    • Email used to debate issues
    • Voting team votes on preferred option.

Notes:

• Several updates made to proposals offered are reflected in the Agenda.
  • Most dialog surrounded First Proposal, We should proceed with identifying teams to build out the presentations.
• Cedric advised group that Sept should be considered for the target date as summer holidays will impact participation in process. Scot Indicated we have to have something for the August board meeting, perhaps we can show progress report.
• Concern about the Operator mix was expressed. Commitment to consider that as a possible issue.
• Voting Process and team members should be considered and approved by Governance Brd on the Thursday meeting.
• Question was raised on Goals. Goals are identified in the GB presentation and will be clearly defined in the presentations of the options.
• Objective for Next week

1) Identify The Subteams to work on options proposals

2) Secure concurrence with CNTT Governance on voting option

3) Begin work on options proposals