Drop the requirement that AC meetings be face-to-face. Fixes #1084.

[hober]

Per #1084 (comment)

---

Preview | Diff

[frivoal]

Since the intent is to provide flexibility, rather than call for meetings to be primarily online, I'd suggest this rather than dropping the mention of F2F altogether.

Suggested change

	<span class="time-interval">twice a year</span>.
	<span class="time-interval">twice a year</span>.
	These meetings should be [=face-to-face meetings|face-to-face=].

[frivoal]

Suggested change

	Nevertheless, facilities <em class=rfc2119>must</em> be provided to enable remote attendance.

Given that this is not specified anywhere, and that discussing face-to-face meetings regularly surfaces the question of whether they are different from hybrid meetings, I thought we might as well make it explicit that face-to-face meetings always provide for remote participation.

[brentzundel]

I'm not opposed to Florian's suggestions, but I prefer the simplicity of the original change. I think it's fine for there to be some room for trust and interpretation of the Process.

This is a case where if the Team begins acting consistently in a way that is not in line with the best interests of the membership (e.g., by making the AC meeting a one-hour teleconference rather than a several-day in-person event), there are other avenues that exists for fixing that. And we can also strengthen the requirements in the Process at that point if other avenues prove insufficient.