Define recusal as per AB resolution on 2019-06-17

Closes #278.

Keeps an inline issue about an unresolved subissue.

index.bs

@@ -1281,30 +1281,28 @@ Recording and Reporting Formal Objections</h4>
 	* the members of the [=Advisory Board=]
 	* the members of the [=Technical Architecture Group=]
 
-	A <dfn lt="recusal | recuse | recuses">recusal</dfn> is required for any of these
-	directly involved in the matter of the [=Formal Objection=]
-	(e.g. that they are a chair, and it is their decision that is in question,
-	or they are the individual who registered the [=Formal Objection=]);
-	other members may recuse themselves if they feel there could be a reasonable perception that they are directly involved.
+	Participants in the [=W3C Council=] <em class=rfc2119>must</em> [=recuse=] themselves
+	if they are the person who issued the decision being objected to,
+	or if they are the person who registered the [=Formal Objection=].
+	Participants may also [=recuse=] themselves for any reason.
+	Any person who has <dfn lt="recusal | recuse | recuses | recused">recused</dfn> themself
+	does not take part in its deliberations,
+	determination of concensus,
+	or votes
+	on this matter.
+	The [=W3C Council=] <em class=rfc2110>may</em> still solicit and hear their testimony,
+	as they can of anyone else in the W3C community.
+
+	Issue: It is still an open question whether someone who has recused themself
+	should still be allowed to participate in the deliberations of the Council
+	even if they are excluded from the consensus/vote.
 
 	The CEO appoints the <dfn>Chair of the W3C Council</dfn>,
 	with the advice of the rest of the Council.
 	This <em class=rfc2919>may</em> be the CEO themself,
 	unless the CEO [=recuses=],
 	in which case they <em class=rfc2119>must</em> find an alternative chair.
 
-	Issue(w3c/w3process#278): Fuzzy criteria for recusal are problematic:
-	individual with only tangential involvement in the matter,
-	or even with no real involvement at all in the matter,
-	could be pressured into recursing themselves.
-	Conversely, over-assertive individuals may fail to [=recuse=] themselves even when it would be appropriate.
-	We may instead want to make a strict and non ambiguous criteria.
-	It is also unclear how useful it is to require recusal from the person raising the objection,
-	since that can easily be circumvented by asking someone else to file the objection on one's behalf.
-	For example, recusal could be required of (and only of):
-	a Chair who issued the [=Chair Decision=] or [=Group Decision=] being objected to,
-	and the CEO for objections against their own decisions and those of the Team.
-
 	Having reviewed the information gathered by the [=Team=] and its recommendation,
 	and after sufficient sufficient deliberation,
 	the [=W3C Council=] decides whether to