small pending issue

[Avri Doria <avri@acm.org>]

>

While reviewing the minutes I realized there was one topic which the 
meeting wanted taken back to the list, and other then it being listed 
in the draft minutes that were floated on the list a while back, it was 
not brought to the list specifically.

so, while the draft is being updated, I figured I better bring it up.

From the minutes:

> Issue 17. Must or should for completion of nomcom process
>
> Discussion and Proposal
>
> Old text says the confirmation process must be completed at least one
> month prior to first IETF. Suggestion to change the must to should.
> Proposal is to leave as is.
>
> Scott says that must implies existence of recourse and there is none.
>
> Joel said job is "do it."
>
> Mike said problem with text is that it's binding on process, not 
> people,
> and suggested changing to musts on people.
>
> Scott suggested changing to "due dates" rather than musts.
>
>
> * Will be taken back to the list - replacing 'must' with discussion of
> "is due by".

current text:

The confirmation process must be completed at least one month prior to 
the first IETF.

suggested text:

The completion of the confirmation process is due one month prior to 
the first IETF.


Is this change acceptable?


thanks
a.