Sandra Hoferichter: Welcome everybody to the second Program Committee Call, the first one in this year. I'm happy that you could all make it.
Heidi Ullrich: Gisella, could you please do the role call?
Gisella Gruber: On today's Academy Program Committee Call we have Sandra Hoferichter, Wolf Ludwig, Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro, Carlos Aguirre, Olivier Crepin-Leblond, Tijani Ben Jemaa, Avri Doria. From staff we have Heidi Ullrich, Silvia Vivanco, Matt Ashtiani, and myself Gisella Gruber, and no apologies noticed. Over to you Sandra, thank you.
Sandra Hoferichter: Thank you Gisella. Just a quick question, action items to be taken down? This is something I have to ask Matt, right?
Matt Ashtiani: Sure, no problem.
Sandra Hoferichter: Okay, so well then let's start. We have a heavy agenda today. First of all I'd like to ask if you can adopt this agenda or if you have any other business to discuss, any addendums to make. If so please let us know now. I see no hands raised. II hear no objections, then I'd take the agenda as adopted. So then let's start with item number three, January issues to agree on, Sandra and Olivier fifteen minutes. It says Point A, date, place, language, diversity, and others to be edited and it says Point B, Academy of FY 13 budget request.
And I'd like to start with B. For those who could not join the last At-Large ALAC Call on Tuesday if you go to the website, maybe I can ask Heidi to copy and paste the link to there, the new budget is published in the working space on the Adobe chat. For those who haven't seen the revised budget you will find two files and there. One is an Excel file, a slightly modified compared to the first one you know that there is another file which says intro and this is a short introduction into the ICANN Academy Budget Proposal because I think this is not adduction of language.
It just should stand alone. It needs some sort of explanation. Also the Academy proposal is not entirely worked out and agreed on, but it gives a rough idea of what this proposed budget proposal is about. I'll try to include it as much as possible and I hope I can cover any request into this budget proposal which has been made on the mailing list or which was raised in our conference calls.
And I'll also draw the attention in the intro that many or a significant amount of At-Large communities strongly proposes to broaden the initiative of an ICANN Academy. It says, "However the At-Large Working Group strongly recommends this synchronization and development of any capacity building provision under the umbrella of an all inclusive ICANN Academy on a long term basis," and I hope that at least at the first point at this stage covers the requests raised by many participants for online trainings going further to a 20 hour face-to-face lecture course and all these things which are discussed since the setup of this Working Group.
However I think that we have to start working on this right now with the curriculums. I'm sorry; I forgot something to mention another thing I would like to explain. Between the first submission of the first proposal and the revised proposal we have here now we had two or three conference calls with ICANN staff, especially ICANN Finance, and the ongoing collaboration ICANN staff was really incredible. Nancy Lupiano from ICANN Finance, for instance, provided us already concrete numbers on the actual cost of having an ICANN Academy within the ICANN Meeting venue in Toronto.
And furthermore she also recommended were discovered a place which is called Glenerin Inn, 30 kilometers away from the ICANN Meeting venue which can be an alternative for an ICANN Academy. You see these, both options, the off-site option and the ICANN Meeting venue option marked in green and in the red in this Excel file you can even see that having the meeting off-site is even slightly cheaper even if you include local transportation you have took over additionally. So, this was actually surprising to me too because so far we were always discussing that having this meeting off-site might have a bigger cost which seems not to be the case at this stage.
We should check for availability and I know from experience there are of course, request which are maybe not covered in this budget, but it gets us very close to the real cost and I think the proposal, if this goes through, where we can really manage to organize and Academy and develop it then further. Are there any questions to this proposal? Olivier I see you have your hand raised. Olivier, please?
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Thank you Sandra, it's Olivier here for the transcript. I was just going to add a couple of more things to what you said with regards to the process. I guess we're all here looking at the budget and some of us have already seen it during the ALAC Call. I have not transmitted this yet to ICANN Finance. I have discussed and we have shared this budget on the Finance and Budget Subcommittee and so the Subcommittee is happy with it and I just wanted to obtain the green light from this committee here to be able to send it over to ICANN Finance.
Sandra Hoferichter: Olivier, do you think we should vote on this?
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: I'm not sure whether a formal vote is needed, but I guess there might be a formal vote required if anybody objects to this being sent to ICANN Finance.
Sandra Hoferichter: I see Sala has raised her hand. Sala do you want to say something to this issue?
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro: First of all Happy New Year Sandra and everyone.
Sandra Hoferichter: Thank you.
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro: Congratulations on excellent work done on the budget and an excellent move to try to get away from the [inaudible 10:04] of budget requests process issue and giving it a plan to stand on its own and so I wish for the best of it and also to the ICANN staff for the work done to get concrete figures done to the grid. As your other comment in terms of options with the budget, I think if we go ahead with the face-to-face off-site option is absolutely better for the reason that you raised under and hopefully from being part of the European [inaudible 10:44] School model as a student I also noticed the advantages of it.
You have concrete [inaudible 10:50] finally facilitated for lectures and also with other students and be able to really immerse without the distractions and I see the European model is a perfect model for face-to-face when you're looking at site options. And I would recommend the Pre-ICANN Meeting model so that people can use their leanings for actual ICANN. And I thank you Sandra for leaving that in, the [inaudible 11:27] request to broaden the scope a little bit.
I know it's a bit too late in the day to accept already the budget and I quite understand that, even so from RO LACs. And I know there has been some discussions, as the previous ALAC call, in shaping the mailing list and maybe when we're developing, I don't attend to get ahead of myself in terms of agenda, but also inline the thing that we are allowing room for.
If we could go through it once we're developing curriculum, that sort of thing, all [inaudible 12:10] in the possibilities that we're not going to be developing the 20 hour of face-to-face, but something that can be generally used as resource packages for other mechanisms aside from face-to-face. And that's it Sandra from me.
Sandra Hoferichter: Thank you Sala. Any other comments? Okay, so then I would take Olivier's point and will ask for evaluation of a formal vote if you agree that the ICANN Subcommittee would submit this proposal to ICANN Finance. Olivier you raise your hand.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Thank you Sandra, it's Olivier. I was going to ask the question the other way around. Does anyone disagree with sending it to ICANN Finance the way it is today? Does anyone have any objections to it because the Finance and Budget Subcommittee has already looked at it and said yes we are moving ahead with it, but it's just a matter of courtesy to find out if the committee here is happy with it then we'll send it? Thank you.
Sandra Hoferichter: I see no objections on the chat and I hear no objections from callers, so then I take this as agreed and I want to close the budget discussion for the first moment at this stage and move on to action item number 3A which is date, place, language, diversity, and other general issues. This was actually the point of where I would have wished to start this but due to time constraints to submit a budget we had to do this first.
One thing I would like to discuss with you very briefly, maybe we can agree on this, is we had talked already about the place and I learned from your comments that you will also prefer having the meeting off-site. It's entirely described in the budget. The aim is to organize the Academy in the most economic way, balancing advantages and disadvantages of those options, so we have to keep this in mind. So, I take the place more or less as agreed to have it off-site.
About the date, we haven’t discussed yet. So far in detail there are many options raised if you talk about 20 hour lecture course which means we are talking about three days and then you have the possibility do it before an ICANN Meeting and maybe you have a possibility to do it after an ICANN Meeting. And there is a third option to split it a little bit, having two days before an ICANN Meeting and one day after or the other way around. For the moment as we discussed also with ICANN staff about availability of board members and everything.
It seems to come to this point that we will have this ICANN Academy immediately before an ICANN Meeting and maybe as sort of a half day or full day of debriefing after the ICANN Meeting on Friday or on Saturday. The idea behind it is that you can give the newcomers an idea of what's going to be happening next week. They have to spring to boards and swim and after this meeting they can ask or they can clarify their questions and maybe better understand what has been explained in the Academy before the ICANN Meeting.
I would like to know what your ideas are on this. Do you have any other ideas? I must say while speaking I couldn't follow the chat, so if there is something on the chat please raise your hand again and speak loud. Avri please?
Avri Doria: I seem to be the dissenting voice on on-site versus off-site and the more I think about it the more I prefer it on-site especially giving the nature of the planning. First of all we are certain that by and large you're not mixing with the group, I mean with the meeting coming in. There may be a few people there and there certainly is event staff there, but that's about all that's there before the Friday and I'm assuming that's when this will be ending.
You know it's certainly on a Friday than the people for the GNSO weekend and other people from [inaudible 18:02] start coming in. But on the three days before that, the Wednesday, Thursday, and into the Friday, the only people that are really there our staff and people setting up so I don't think that the thing we worry about, about being in a separate place where we can interact with each other, is a problem. Second, in terms of using staff employees and in terms of wanting some of the senior people, some of those that can tell you about the upcoming meetings during those days are more likely to be at the venue.
Some of your specialist teachers you may have better access to them from there. Thirdly it offers and the social context and opportunity to mingle with some of those staffers who want to be off-site with you but are critical resource to any new leader, knowing them, and having met them face-to-face, lifted a drink and told a joke, is a strong part of the introduction for new leaders. So, that's why the more I think about it the more in favor I am of certainly temporally displaced, but in the same place people are there, they settle in, they train, they talk, they discuss, and then they merge into the meeting without an abrupt interruption. Thank you.
Sandra Hoferichter: Thank you Avri and I must say you raised a very valuable comment on this which also has me thinking about some of the ideas. I especially liked that point that some of the experience that members might not be available for an off-site solution, but would be rather better to catch inside. And finally I want to draw your attention again on the last sentence, "The aim is to organize it in the most economical way," and if even the off-site option is the cheaper one then I think we now have to stick to this performance.
Well, let's see, I think this is not up to the budget. It is not entirely in our hands anymore I'm afraid. Salanieta was the next to raise her hand. Salanieta please?
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro: Yes, very quickly. In terms of having it off-site in Pre ICANN, the other thing also to consider which you have a full on engagement with each other and with the faculty and I'm [inaudible 20:59] that the quality department, meaning ICANN, will be sending their staff and this is a critical time. And I think building it and understanding nurturing relationships will only be heightened once we all get into the actual ICANN Meeting. So, if we were to hold it on-site I just feel were little bit [inaudible 21:35] as it will be people off-site and then to have the opportunity to [inaudible 21:41], ICANN team, that sort of thing.
I think it's critical at this stage giving the complexity of the ICANN and the diversity of the various technical policies an environment which doesn't have any distractions is critical and they will have to interact with the various [inaudible 22:02] and once they move on-site [inaudible 22:05]. Just those comments, thank you.
Sandra Hoferichter: Thank you Salanieta. I had to have people in the world so Olivier Crepin is next. Olivier please?
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Thanks very much Sandra, it's Olivier. I'd like to agree with what Avri said prior to meeting and I'm saying this from experience. There are very few ICANN people around, ICANN as an ICANN community walking around the ICANN venue. All that you have his staff setting things up and also ICANN staff that is there to prepare meetings, prepare things for the board, etc., basically get paperwork and get things ready for when the community starts rolling in.
And the second thing that I think Avri pointed out very well was access to staff, that people like Philly, Margie, the various ICANN staff that are involved in the policy discussion and will be able to provide lectures, access will be a lot higher at the venue itself then if they have to, just for an hours lecture or an hour and a half, take a bus or a coach or a taxi to go to the other venue. That's my only concern about having it totally off-site, thirty kilometers away.
You probably are likely to get staff to hang around for a lot more time with the newcomers, with the class if you want, if they're on-site because whenever they'll have half an hour or twenty minutes they might say, " Hey, you know what I'm going to pass by the class and find out how they're doing and I'll be available for questions." That's the thing and with that said, as you said yourself Sandra, the matter is not really in our hands any more.
It's going to be a discussion I guess between ICANN Finance and also some of those staff that are going to be involved with providing the teaching. And so I must say I was very happy to see that Nancy Lupiano managed to find the cost off-site and on-site and at the end of the day there's no huge difference between the two, so either one would be fine I think finance wise. Thank you.
Sandra Hoferichter: Thank you Olivier and yes I agree in terms of the availability of staff and will we have to see what happens now. Tijani, you raised your hand? Please, Tijani.
Tijani Ben Jemaa: So, I certainly agree with Avri with the venue of the [inaudible 25:34] especially if we do it just [inaudible 25:39] with the ICANN Meeting. So, the advantage of the off-site will not be real in this case. It will not be inaudible [inaudible 25:52] and the meeting at the same time will be [inaudible 25:56] and well the meeting. So, I agree that we should do it [inaudible 26:03] to the ICANN Meeting. I also agree to do it inside the meeting venue and I think that the idea of have the date [inaudible 26:14] after the meeting will be very good. Thank you.
Sandra Hoferichter: Thank you Tijani. So, I take more or less as agreed or have --
Carlos Aguirre: Sandra?
Sandra Hoferichter: Yes?
Carlos Aguirre: It's Carlos.
Sandra Hoferichter: Carlos okay.
Carlos Aguirre: Sorry, I have no internet access so I have some comments. In relation to what Avri said and you said, off-site or on-site I have no preference. I agree with you that with on-site it's important that the most economic way is important to. If we have a facility I have no problem. It serves the venues, great. I don't know. I suppose this site. The other side three days is good, 20 hours is good, a half day I don't there is [inaudible 27:37] there. It's a good time to [inaudible 27:41] the course.
And I have some questions because through the course immediately before the ICANN Meeting we need to take account, for instance, gentle work two days before ICANN Meetings, a full day. So, the newcomers or new member [inaudible 28:22] impossible to attract, this was the thing to consider I think.
Sandra Hoferichter: Okay, thank you Carlos. Indeed you are right. GNSO starts on Saturday already, please correct me if I’m wrong and we discussed this with ICANN staff already. Avri says, "Yes before has to mean Wednesday, Friday," exactly. That's what I was going to say. If you talk about before an ICANN meeting we are talking about Wednesday to Friday and the question is we take one day --
Carlos Aguirre: If it's Wednesday to Friday it's okay, no problem because GNSO work has to be on Saturday. Yes okay, no problem.
Sandra Hoferichter: Okay, so I think if you just do half a day of a wrap-up then we can even say the Academy actually lasts three and a half days because I don't want to cut off one day for the wrap-up after the ICANN Meeting because I know everybody is quite exhausted after a meeting and two days are not very long to interact with each other.
So, my proposal would be to have the ICANN Academy from Wednesday to Friday and have half a day or at least two or three hours of wrap-up after the ICANN Meeting, how it fits in the plan either on Friday or on Saturday, whatever is possible. Are there any objections against this proposal? Tijani, you raised your hand please?
Tijani Ben Jemaa: No Sandra I'm sorry, it was a remaining hand raised.
Sandra Hoferichter: Okay, then I see Sala has raised her hand. Sala please?
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro: Thank you Sandra. I'm just wondering would it be possible to have it from Tuesday to Friday because I know three days is going to be very intense giving the diverse issues and the diverse things that we'd like to [inaudible 31:02] and that sort of thing.
Sandra Hoferichter: If this was a question I didn't understand it because it was very noisy on the line Sala. Was it a question or a comment?
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro: Yes, a question and a comment. I actually put it on my chat, having it from Tuesday through Friday.
Sandra Hoferichter: From Tuesday through Friday, these are four days.
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro: Yes, four days.
Sandra Hoferichter: No this is not in the budget line included. We had counted the three days only. Even half a day more and my request for another additional night, which is not covered yet, but I think we could find a solution to have a wrap-up before the people leave on Friday before the board meeting or something like that. I think we will find a solution about this. It does not necessarily have to be the last day.
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro: Sure or you could have Wednesday through Friday then at least an additional day on-site. I don't know how that would work, but some sort of practical mode.
Sandra Hoferichter: Yes, the wrap-up on-site, not going off-site again if we might go off-site.
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro: Yep, but at least four days.
Sandra Hoferichter: No, we are only talking about three days and if we can manage to get a half day for a wrap-up then we have three and a half, but if we can't manage this and we have to cut this from the budget then it's let's say two and a half days or two days off-site or Pre-ICANN Meeting and one day as a wrap-up. We have to stick to three days. There's no way of extension.
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro: [Inaudible 32:58] I know exactly why I wanted to --
Sandra Hoferichter: Okay, Olivier you raised your hand.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Thank you Sandra it's Olivier here. My comment was in response to Sala's idea of extending by one more day. This has actually been discussed and the answer from some people in the community was that three days is already a long time. You have to remember that some people take time off work, so one week is enough for them. Ten days is what we have now because we are looking at the length of an ICANN Meeting plus three days prior to this.
Anymore than that and you will have some people who simply not attend and then you'll have people who will attend just three days out of the four or two days under the for and they'll miss out and it will just be a mess. I think the longest that we can stretch things for is the three days. Thank you.
Sandra Hoferichter: Yes, I'd liked on the line would Olivier just said and Heidi posted it in the chat this well. We have to find a solution for a wrap-up of after an ICANN Meeting, but in case there is no other possibility we have to cut this after today's, a priority ICANN meeting one day after but this is something we have to discuss once the proposal has been approved and once we have the concrete schedule for the ICANN Meeting where we can see where it fits. Okay, so I think we decided on dates and place.
I summarize dates will be three days prior to an ICANN Meeting, Wednesday to Friday with an open question on how we should do the wrap-up place. There are advantages and disadvantages for both options, however at the end we have to do it the most economic way. The last item I have here, language diversity. To be honest we cannot really discuss this anymore as translation is never seen in the budget.
This was the thing which should have been discussed before the budget was settled, but on the other hand a key element of the face-to-face meeting is the interaction with each other and interpretation would not allow that much interaction with each other. And on the other hand if you sit together during the night, having a beer on a networking event and discussing ICANN issues or during a presentation or whatever you want to have the interpreter which you, so we must insist that people are able to communicate and understand English.
There is no other way because setting up the translation or interpretation facilities with absolutely broadened the budget which would kill the proposal itself. I see two hands raised and I'm really excited to hear your opinions. Tijani please?
Tijani Ben Jemaa: Sandra the thing is are newcomers for the ICANN Board isn't it?
Sandra Hoferichter: ICANN Board and SOs and ACs.
Tijani Ben Jemaa: Yeah, okay. Now it is more difficult. Okay as you know the official language of ICANN is English and I have been always strongly advocating for the diversity language diversity, but in this case we will not be able to have that interpretation during this class because of a lot of things. If you do it off-site it will be more difficult because the interpreter is not there. If it is on-site it will be easier but it will be also a lot of problems to bring the interpreters three days before the meeting and the behavior you would pay for it.
This is for the diversity language diversity, but for the venue you said you will choose the cheapest solution. I don't agree because the aim is not to have a cheap cost, cheap training, the aim is to have efficient training and I do think that on-site in the ICANN Meeting venue we will have a better quality training for the reason that Avri said and therefore we all know how it is better to do it on-site. Thank you.
Sandra Hoferichter: Thank you Tijani. Olivier you are next please.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Thank you Sandra, it's Olivier. I was going to agree with Tijani on the subject of translators and interpreters. The people who were going to be pursuing the course are all the people who will take on responsibility and one of the primary things they need to know is to speak English, to express themselves in English. So, it would just serve as the wrong indication to have interpretation on this.
On the other hand when we are going to start looking at capacity building that's a totally different kettle of fish because capacity building has to be as inclusive as possible and therefore for anything that deals with capacity building I would be a strong advocate for interpretation in local languages. But, we are not at the stage of capacity building, we're dealing with the ICANN Academy and that's in English. Thank you.
Sandra Hoferichter: Thank you Olivier, any other comments? Okay, Carlos do you have a comment on this because I know you are not on the chat?
Carlos Aguirre: No, I have no comment but I think again Olivier and Tijani I consider it very [inaudible 40:12] with translations and interpretation. Thank you.
Sandra Hoferichter: Thank you Carlos. So then I can take this as more or less agreed that language diversity which was not foreseen in the budget should not be offered during this face-to-face ICANN Academy. Tijani you raised your hand?
Tijani Ben Jemaa: Yes, Sandra. Perhaps we can do something for the diversity. We can provide the whole training material in at least three languages, so that people can at least have the [inaudible 40:54] in several languages. Thank you.
Sandra Hoferichter: That's a good idea. That's a good point. I just took note of this. Okay, so then I'll like to move on to the next very important point, drafting curriculum. Unfortunately I haven't got any answer on the email I sent to you the middle of January. I don't know if some of you we remember where I was proposing that in order to work on the curriculum to setup a Staff Working Group. I know we have many real academic experts in our group.
I think of Hong, Avri, Carlos, Glen McKnight, Bill Drake, which are even the part of the Program Committee here and because I'm not a teacher and I'm not an academic person I would like to give this more or less or to ask them who has the capacity, who has the knowledge to setup a curriculum to start to work on this and make a proposal. Of course I would be apart of this group, but I would propose not to extend it to more then ten people to work in the most efficient way.
I don't think we can discuss how the curriculum might look like, but what I was going to ask you is if you agree to setup the Staff Working Group which can start on a proposal Avri Doria already made before Christmas, but I think this was just the wrong time for many people because it was somehow forgotten. But I would take up on this point and would ask for your ideas, for your comments to setup such a Staff Working Group to work on this proposal. I'm excited to hear your ideas. Avri please?
Avri Doria: Hi, I'm obviously more then willing to continue working on it. I put out there, yeah I know I'm one of those people that doesn't take holiday seriously and what can I do. I don't know. We're talking about a subgroup to the subgroup now? I think those of us that want to work on it should. I don't know that we need a subgroup especially in terms of talking on a list. We should just talk on this list and whether it's working on the draft that I put there versus somewhere else or someone else's new draft.
I don't know that we need a subgroup and I think the opinions of those that have sat through these programs as well as those that have organized them can be just as valuable in discussing/arguing about a curriculum. So, I don't know that I would actually build a subgroup although I think that when you get right down to it it's only a subgroup that will actually work on it with the rest listening and monitoring and putting in comments when they felt comments were necessary.
Sandra Hoferichter: Okay point taken Avri, thank you. Salanieta you are next.
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro: Yes, very quickly. I think in terms of the language diversity option I would like us to suspend a discussion from any language diversity and seek instructions from the RALOs which we represent in relation to language diversity and [inaudible 45:11]. Although I respect that we're notified that you combine English you combine [inaudible 45:20] language and I think also that it has to be made as to what location this is coming out of. It's [inaudible 45:29] or is it something that involves other constituencies and whether it's coming out of other [inaudible 45:36] budget.
But if it's in relation to and the At-Large community with which and of whom we represent and whose interest we undertake to look out for and I think it's critical that we don't marginalize and of course we can look at other means and ways to discuss the language diversity. And I would like to propose something Sandra that we should have a separate meeting after we've taken instructions just to talk about the language diversity aspects of it and it shouldn't be restricted to discussions with other matters into it. It's a very critical thing in my view and [inaudible 46:25].
Sandra Hoferichter: Thank you Sala and before I answer I see there is a long queue and I'd like to Olivier the floor please. Olivier?
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Thank you very much Sandra, it's Olivier for the transcript. Sala I'm really sorry, I think you might be confusing capacity building in the Academy.
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro: First of all Olivier I'm not confusing it with capacity building when I'm talking about the translation [inaudible 47:03] from the on-site face-to-face and I want to read the fairness of material options as in terms of the material having been translated. I understand the [inaudible 47:14] Olivier. We all commented across the room, but I'm restricting my comments to the face-to-face.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: The problem Sala is that the people who are going to go to the Academy I think will be 15 people each year coming to the Academy and the only aim of the Academy is to prepare those people for the leadership positions that they're going to take at ICANN. So, it's not something that will be extended to people who are not going to take leadership positions at ICANN and the bylaws mandate, and this is something which we've discussed on several occasions in the past, that you need to be able to express yourself in English, to read English, to function, to work in English.
So, apart from the cost involve of course it would also be setting the wrong precedence to start with an Academy that is in the six UN languages or in Spanish, English and French let's say and then drop these people in an environment that is 100% in English and where if they don't speak English correctly and they're not able to express themselves in English their views are not going to be taken into account. And I'm looking at specific environments like the board which is a particularly harsh environment where board members will just shun you aside if you're not able to express yourself.
That's how hard it is and while I completely agree with you that it would be a lot more inclusive to have it in more then one language I think that we should look at the Academy for the purpose that it is set today and aside from that develop a capacity building program for the people in At-Large. And we've already started doing this with the General Assemblies. Well, what happened in Africa in Dakar which we actually had in French and in English. It was a bilingual thing.
But the Academy itself as it stands at the moment has grown to something that has become larger than just an At-Large Academy. It's become an ICANN Academy and we're somehow bound by the various rules and one of them being that people need to be able to express themselves in English. Thank you.
Sandra Hoferichter: Thank you Olivier for your very valuable comments and I see the comments on this chat are even very active. Avri is next.
Avri Doria: Yes thank you. I got two points to make, one is sort of a process issue and one is a directed point. Among the things that this leadership needs to be taught is ICANN's language and it isn't just about ICANN and about the priorities and about the issues. It's actually being able to speak and understand ICANN's language with what these words actually mean and the words behind concept.
Now if you start trying to translate that by anyone who doesn't know ICANN perfectly in those other languages and I'm not sure how good ICANN in other languages is. I think you're actually creating greater confusion for the leadership. They have to learn the ICANN meaning, the expressions, the names of things, so that's the pedagogical point.
The process point is you got to remember we are a subgroup of the Academy group with a charter. I think before this subgroup goes running of to RALO, of course someone within a RALO is always able to get their RALO opinions, but I think we need to take it back to the whole Academy group and not presume that this group is the only part of the Academy group. We're just sort of the curriculum, so if we have an issue I think that it's there's that we need to go to first not immediately to the RALOs or ALAC. Thank you.
Sandra Hoferichter: Thank you Avri. Wolf is next in the row. Wolf please?
Wolf Ludwig: I think we are now sliding away by discussing options which are beyond the discussion from the very beginning. I think the proposal which is on the workspace is rather clear in target groups in that it's all ICANN. It's an At-Large [inaudible 52:41]. It's coming from At-Large, but it's not addressed purely to At-Large people, but including all of the ICANN constituencies etc. and it's clearly focused on newly selected ICANN leadership. It says 15 to 20 people who are annually selected by NomCom or by the support organization or advisory committees.
So with this is clearer and I think it's a waste of time here to discuss about any visible additional language options, but I can really tell you I'm living in a multilingual country. Most of the conferences and meetings I regularly attend and Switzerland are multilingual following certain particular necessities of this country, but I can tell you I've organized plenty of such conferences. The translation cost it's always a side argument to argue, yes we can use volunteers etc. for translation.
It's always underestimating what professional interpreters are doing, professional interpreters is three years training to do it properly. So, this side effort, yes we can do it on a voluntary basis. It's not focus and is not showing some results needed and I think it may be a basic demand as it was for most of us if you are coming into and ICANN Leadership position. But as Olivier said before, it's also according to the bylaws. You need to have a basic command of English and it's not an Outreach.
It's not anything capacity oriented like you have for African ALSs in Dakar or when you have at a next meeting for the American ALSs somewhere in Latin America. Well, of course at this level you need to choose the option of having it offered in French or Spanish, but for ICANN Leadership people, fifteen people, before the next meeting, before they get into the position. I think English is a must and I think it's a waste of time to continue any other language options. Thanks a lot.
Sandra Hoferichter: Thank you Wolf. I have Sala now in the row, but Sala please I see you're also very active on the chat. Before I give the last word and I ask you to be very brief because we are wasting the time where we should actually discuss the curriculum and the Outreach things. I just like to summarize the point which was just raised, why we do not have interpretation for ICANN Academy. The first one is the bylaws mandate that ICANN Leadership positions is whoever applies for an ICANN leadership position is required to communicate in English.
This is the first one, where the idea comes from. The second one is the interaction among the ICANN Academy participants and also the interactions later during their term. It is absolutely necessary to communicate in English because otherwise your word would not be heard. And the third thing is on the budget. It will extend the budget. We will not get such a budget like this to start for the first trial and the whole idea will not become true. I agree with Wolf, there is no alternative, as Avri mentioned also, to understand ICANN terms.
It is very hard even for an English-speaking person, but for a non-trained interpreter it's more or less confusing and meaningless to translate this into other languages just for the sake of language diversity. You can expect those people sitting in the classroom or in the venue, wherever that is, are able to communicate in English because they applied for a leadership position where this is a required character. So, please Sala I give you the last word on this.
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro: Thank you. First of all in terms of those who have been preparing for the leadership roles I think I was under the, and Olivier was right, misconception that it was actually for a camp or primarily for At-Large people and the other people were of course invited. And I thought we were training our people so that they can better understand processes so that they can better engage. But, clearly I was confused and yes you're right Olivier and for that I of course apologize for my [inaudible 58:48].
On another meeting in terms of the language diversity discussion, yes Wolf I hear you and I agree with you and where you're coming from. And I think in relation to a notion from ICANN Academy which is posted in the actual workspace and a recommendation for and I think also to the group. I don't know. I'm [inaudible 59:17] to know that this is more of a leadership training thing or I don't know other type and stuff, but can meet us and whatnot.
But, I thought that I should go on record now for saying that I prefer the mandate should be looking into ourselves and into looking at how to build our At-Large base and channeling resources there and to postpone it to after Toronto and having others go first. I think we should let someone else deal [inaudible 59:49] and we should focus on how to empower our At-Large people, but I suppose it's too late in the day now. But, I just thought I'd put up. Thank you.
Sandra Hoferichter: Thank you Sala and if you will look at a structure of the ICANN community wiki space you see that our proposal, the ICANN Academy was born in Work Team B, the recommendation for or are you looking at it comes from Work Team D and this proposal was made in Work Team B and that's where the proposal was developed in August. So, we are talking about two different pairs of shoes and what everything else should be or could be developed is not the goal of this group.
It can be linked to each other and we can shift to other aspects later on, but at the moment we are under time pressure and we have to fulfill to setup an ICANN Academy for Toronto and that's it. Olivier you raised your hand?
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Thank you Sandra, it's Olivier for the transcript. Actually Sala on the link that you sent, the recommendations for a link is the follow-up to the Interim Report that the ALAC has submitted last year. Now the ALAC report itself which is the report on the At-Large Improvements Project [inaudible 01:01:24] Report of the 9th of October 2011 and I recommend that you read through it. I don't know whether you have or not, but its got all of the recommendations and in fact the ICANN Academy itself was basically branched off from that report already prior to the follow-up.
Now the follow-up that you're seeing is actually the next recommendation which is, "Establish an engagement program for existing At-Large ALS members to be conducted year round and modeled after a certain aspects of the Diplo Foundation," and that is what you are now seeing in the follow-up work that Cheryl is leading on the At-Large Improvements. This will eventually, and we're hoping sooner rather then later, come up with an actual engagement program and a capacity building program.
We already had a first look at it, a first test of it, with the capacity building program that took place in Dakar. But obviously a lot more needs to be done in this and you will be interested to hear that in the Costa Rica meeting we're going to have in San Jose the Sunday morning is all going to be devoted to Outreach and also devoted to capacity building.
And in fact there is a plan also to have you and, I guess I might as well tell you rather then emailing you later. It makes less work for me. You will be a key part in discussing this and him getting the ball rolling basically from Costa Rica onwards, but these are two parallel things and the Academy has to be ready earlier than the capacity building.
You know we can start every single process simultaneously, but we definitely are not going to wait until the ICANN Academy is running in Toronto to start looking at capacity building. The two were going to be in parallel by that time. Thank you.
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro: Thank you, that's good to know.
Sandra Hoferichter: Okay, so we can finish with Point 3 now, language diversity, date, place, and budget and I opened already the discussion on the draft curriculum and I recall what Avri said to my proposal to establish a subgroup and I must say thinking about it, it makes sense if we start a discussion on the mailing list with a draft proposal. Those who feel enabled to participate and feel enabled to put in their input will lead the discussion.
Others will follow on monitoring the whole discussion. Are there any other opinions? I see Carlos is on the chat now as well, so please anybody who has an opinion in terms of setting up a subgroup or not let me know. Avri you raised your hand please?
Avri Doria: Yeah, I just wanted to say that if we followed that pattern and if people want I'm more than willing to go through the variety of information that was there on the wiki with regarding people's comments and see if I can't update the version that was put out and try and take as much of that into account as its within the Academy notion and put out another and both fix it there and send it out to the email list for people that may not be comfortable with that. So, if you do want to follow the general, this little group, which is the curriculum, whatever we call ourselves, then I can take it on myself to take those two steps. Of course if someone else would prefer to do it I'm more than willing to step back.
Sandra Hoferichter: Thank you Avri. Carlos you raised your hand? Carlos you might be muted. He says my line is down. Okay could somebody please tell him he will be able to speak later? He's disconnected. Okay, any other opinions or any other objections? So then I will be more then happy to take up Avri's suggestion to actually copy and paste the proposed curriculum already and publish it to the whole Working Group for discussion. I will deliver my input so far as well, but I think what Avri offered on [inaudible 01:07:06] was very first in a very good move.
I know and you may have recognized as well that Siva and Glenn and also Hong made some very valuable proposals in terms of peer-to-peer mentoring or setup a model or a Scrum, whatever this is. I was trying to find out before. It must be something with online learning and I think this is even the point where recommendation for, which Sala mentioned before, and the ICANN proposal can be linked to each other, but maybe not at this stage. Maybe later on during the year, but this should be the focus to develop some things in parallel and to link them to each other. Carlos could you connect now?
Carlos Aguirre: Yes, I'm here.
Sandra Hoferichter: Okay, your floor.
Carlos Aguirre: Yes, my comment is short and in relation with the curriculum subgroup. My comment is we are a subgroup. On the other side I think we can construct and build a subgroup, but we can discuss in the teleconference our ideas. I have some points and some issues, some subject very important to put in the curriculum to start the discussion. I don't know if you want me to say it now.
Sandra Hoferichter: Yes please, why not.
Carlos Aguirre: Okay, I think that the first point to put into the curriculum is what if ICANN, in this point the implement and history of ICANN. And the second point, very important to me, is to explain for the newcomers the bylaws on operation, rules, and precedence. The difference I see on [inaudible 01:09:37] on the functions in the instructor of these communities all support the organizations. For me the first point is to ensure that in the curriculum. Thank you.
Sandra Hoferichter: Thank you Carlos. Question, would you agree if Avri or who else publish a first proposal including your comments now to the whole Working Group or do you propose to discuss this within this small group for the moment?
Carlos Aguirre: I think this is important to discuss in a small group, to agree on some subjects or some issues and then add new members discuss deeply I think.
Sandra Hoferichter: Okay, I see Olivier has agreed to this. Avri quickly as well, but Avri raised her hand as well, maybe she wants to answer to Carlos? Avri please?
Avri Doria: Yeah thanks, this is Avri. I think I'm going to have to either relisten to the tape or perhaps communicate with you to make sure that I've understood what you're saying because I trouble understanding sometimes when you speak and I've heard people have that problem with me too. And I certainly include that change was there, ad was there or what have you based on that.
I definitely agree with Carlos that if I'm the one that's doing it as I said I'm find for someone else to do it if someone would prefer to do it, that whatever I produce as my take on what's coming out of the discussion be reviewed by this group before it goes further. So, I will be uncomfortable with any of us taking the significance of that and calling it a curriculum and then sending it directly to the group without this group having had a chance to beat up on it first. Thank you.
Sandra Hoferichter: Okay, thank you. I would absolutely agree to Carlos's proposal and Avri's support. Are there any other objections, any other ideas? Olivier you raised your hand?
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Thank you Sandra, it's Olivier. I was just going to suggest also that this group considers any material which has already been drafted and has already been prepared for the fellowship. There might be some interesting material in there. I mean it might be stuff that the curriculum that you are going to put together actually mandates, b if the material is already out there just integrated. I don't see any copyright problems or anything like that, it's still ICANN. Thank you.
Sandra Hoferichter: Avri would you please repeat?
Avri Doria: I was trying to figure out what info Olivier is referring to.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Documents, material, that is made available to the ICANN Fellows. There is some material that staff and various people have already developed and I thought it would be good to also integrate that and make use of that as well.
Avri Doria: Okay. What would be good then if someone who, and perhaps that's you Olivier, I don't know, but if someone who knows that stuff and believes that stuff should be included could quickly go through it all because for me I've never seen that stuff. So, if I'm going to integrate it, it means I'd have a long period of reading it all at this point before doing the sentences which I'm fine with doing. It just makes things take longer.
But if somebody already knows what's valuable in there that should be included that isn't currently included it would be great if they could just make a note of it and email and put it in the wiki or whatever, otherwise I'll go through it and read it, but I know nothing about fellowship and fellowship material. All I know is that I go in there once during the week, during breakfast, and tell them a story about something.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: My I respond Sandra please?
Sandra Hoferichter: Yes, please.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Thank you. It's Olivier for the transcript. I'm not an expert either. Perhaps Heidi or Janice might know. I don't know. Heidi do you have a suggestion? We can't hear you.
Sandra Hoferichter: Avri you raised your hand again?
Avri Doria: No, it was an accident.
Sandra Hoferichter: Okay, so I had a bad line for a moment, but I would propose now is to start quickly. Avri proposed to my point of view a very good inaudible [01:15:17] before Christmas and I would just like to ask Avri to copy and paste this whole thing and submit it to this small Working Group and whoever has access to the fellowship curriculum and other materials, maybe Heidi or other staff person. I think this is an action item to take down and the search for this existing curriculum materials for the fellowship program and then we should start on commenting on this before we submitted to the entire Working Group.
But this should also happen quite soon because I know in the working group there are other experts which like to give their input. I mentioned that Glenn and Siva already. I know Hong is willing. I think Bill is a valuable resource to include, so we should do this very quickly just to produce a first draft to be submitted to the Working Group. It should not be at the final document in my point of view. Do you agree to this or are there any objections? I see none.
Then I would like to repeat ask Avri to submit her proposal to this small Program Committee and ask Matt to take down as an action item to search for the existing materials for the fellowship and other programs. Matt could you please --
Matt Ashtiani: I have it [01:17:10], don't worry.
Sandra Hoferichter: Okay, thank you Matt. Thank you for responding.
Heidi Ullrich: Sandra this is Heidi?
Sandra Hoferichter: Yes?
Heidi Ullrich: Sorry, I don't know what was going on technically. My computer's not working and my phone wasn't until just a moment ago. But could I suggest for that action item that we involve [inaudible 01:17:28] for the newcomers as well as Janice for the fellowship and that they can invite information that they think might be relevant for this.
Sandra Hoferichter: Yes, absolutely. You can link them to me. This would be great and I'll submit it then to the Program Committee crew.
Heidi Ullrich: Okay. Matt if you can add that maybe to the action item. Thank you.
Sandra Hoferichter: Okay, so we are running short of time and I see item number four as agreed now. Let's move to item number five, planning for the Costa Rica ICANN Meeting. I don't want to extend it to fifteen minutes. It was discussed. Let me give you a short summary. It has been discussed that ICANN staff and Finance and the various calls as a side mark actually, but it was always mentioned that the Outreach to the entire ICANN community to start immediately.
We should not wait until Costa Rica. There will be somehow a face-to-face meeting with other constituency members, but we should start to develop the Outreach process right now before and I would like to ask you for your ideas on how this process could be started. If you have any experience in this because I do not have the Cross Community or the Cross Constituency work experience, so I absolutely rely on you to give some ideas how to start with this.
And then I think we should go with a very clear plan how to sell our proposal to the community and we can keep in our mind that this proposal is not unknown anymore. There are many people who are aware of this and are excited to find out more about it. I would ask you now for some proposals on how to get this thing started before the Costa Rica Meeting. The floor is open. Olivier please?
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Thank you Sandra. I was waiting to see if everyone was going to speak all at once, but so it is I thought I'd put my hand up. I think my view on how things could develop is as follows. I think that the Program Committee should put together a program and shared with the wider Working Group and let the Working Group finalize, I would say, a first sort of public draft if you want. And then I think that a webinar could be organized where I guess you would be conducting the webinar.
You know, basically an ICANN wide webinar, prior to the Costa Rica meeting to explain what the ICANN Academy proposal is and to also present the draft proposal, the draft academic offering, so that basically then we have a community that already knows about the program before arriving in Costa Rica.
And then you can utilize a face-to-face meeting in Costa Rica to integrate the suggestions of the other SOs and ACs, but by that time they would have already had time to digest the Academy, digest the concept, digest the documents that have been produced, and be able to make productive and positive discussions and positive contribution during the face-to-face meeting so that right after Costa Rica you'll have direct input from the community and you will be able to finalize the program and finalize things well in time to be able to implement it.
And that's of course if it gets funded. It's always the big if, if it gets funded. But that's the timeline that I thought about seeing to, to be able to launch the ball early enough so that we don't end up too late for the finalization of the program and getting things moving. Thank you.
Sandra Hoferichter: Thank you Olivier and for the webinar if it happens I definitely will ask you to be on my side. Carlos raised his hand. Carlos please, you have the floor.
Carlos Aguirre: Yeah, thank you Sandra. I agree with Olivier. It's a good point, but I want to add the proposal to make some introduction to the newcomers in Costa Rica. For instance, giving the concept of what means knowledge, what means participation, what means engagement in ICANN. For me it's important to say to the newcomers what's important is the introduction in the ICANN environment, explain the meeting of participation and engagement. Thank you.
Sandra Hoferichter: Thank you Carlos and just to make it crystal clear with newcomers you mean those participants of the Fellowship Program?
Carlos Aguirre: No, if we make something in [inaudible 01:24:13] Costa Rica for the newcomers I consider important to explain the meaning of these words, participation and engagement and make some presentation adding or more then Olivier proposed.
Sandra Hoferichter: Okay, thank you Carlos. I don't think I do understand it entirely because --
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Can I jump in?
Sandra Hoferichter: Yes.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Carlos it's Olivier. Do you mean the people from the other SOs and ACs bringing their input to the process?
Carlos Aguirre: Yes.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Okay yeah, that's much clearer. So, effectively explaining to the people from the other SOs and ACs that what is participation, what is those things. And I see your point because it is true that some people at ICANN still don't know what is participation, what is multi-stakeholder and what is integration.
Carlos Aguirre: Yes.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Okay, thank you.
Sandra Hoferichter: Okay, I think I got it and I absolutely agree with you because if you go back, and I'd like to do this again and again, going back to the very first draft project proposal from August 2011 there is a very big introduction about participation, what they called a point of departure, a business process, IGF first related models, all the those things. And I absolutely agree with what Carlos says we have of course in order to sell the idea to the community you have to go into this depth before in order to convince them to jump on the train and support this proposal and send their future leaders to the ICANN Academy. Are there other comments on Outreach?
I see none, so I will come back to Olivier's proposal. He said the first draft program submitted by Avri to the Program Committee and then to the Working Group which will end in a draft proposal could be committed to the ICANN community through a webinar or at first on the website maybe and then through a webinar before Costa Rica. And then if we have time at least, well a bit more then a month, to plan the face-to-face meeting during San Jose. I think this sounds like a good idea to me. Before I give the floor to Avri I would quickly ask staff if you see organizing a webinar as a thing which is possible. Do you think we can manage this or is this a big thing to organize?
Heidi Ullrich: This is Heidi. No, I don't think that it would be a problem. It's just basically you would need to provide some slides and the material for that and then we can set it up very quickly.
Sandra Hoferichter: Okay, so what would you propose from the timeline it maybe not to be held because I know before an ICANN Meeting, I know this for myself, people are very busy because they are off for a week and have to do a lot of things and I'm afraid if we do it one week before we want have that much participation. What would you prefer Heidi or staff?
Heidi Ullrich: I’m just discussing with Gisella in terms of the timing. I think that early February or mid February would be fine. [inaudible 01:28:13] to send out a Doodle which will probably take a week, to the AC, SOs, and then we would hold a call the following week. So, it's really a two week period.
Sandra Hoferichter: Okay, so we have actually only two weeks to work on a draft curriculum. Avri I think you have some comment on this issue. Thank you Heidi for the moment.
Avri Doria: Thank you. I'm thinking about the schedule. I was thinking this will be rushing it. Also with the way that [inaudible 01:28:43] things I find myself a little confused on my current action item, so I wanted to check on that. I thought that I was going to gather what I had written and try and take the rest into account the stuff that had been said and post that to [inaudible 01:29:00]. It sounds like you're saying now I should just cut what I did previously and send that to us. I'd like clarification on that.
If even in that case if it's talking about two weeks before we're ready to say to this subgroup and the group, on which we are apart, it's fine with us that cutting it close especially since we don't even have a meeting planned yet for that other group and I don't think we've been giving them much of an update on what we're doing. Maybe we have, I don't know. So that's cutting it close, but if there is to be a webinar I'll certainly help with it. But I think it's pressing it and I'm not sure what the value is in doing a webinar on this material before Costa Rica when this is about a plan for Toronto. Thanks.
Sandra Hoferichter: Thank you Avri. I agree in terms of the time constraints. I'm not sure about the meaning of a webinar. I have attended some. I don't know. Other opinions? Olivier you raised your hand please?
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Thank you Sandra. It's Olivier for the transcript. The need for a webinar I was going to suggest the week starting the 20th of February which gives three weeks or more than three weeks, nearly four weeks for this group to produce something. So you'll be looking at the 20th or 22nd. Well, maybe the 22nd, 23rd, or 24th of February. The reason why I suggested the webinar prior to the Costa Rica meeting is I'm concerned about two things. One, that if we wait too long the rest of the community who by the way has already heard about the ICANN Academy because it has already been shared across SOs and AC Chairs and has already been shared somehow by ICANN staff as well.
There's been interest from many people saying, "Hey, I'd like to say a few things about this. I'd like to be able to talk about it and I'd like to bring some input to this or I'd like to help," and if we wait so long and we come up with something in Costa Rica I'm just concerned that we will be accused of doing things behind people's backs and not being inclusive enough of other SOs and ACs. We need to get them to adopt this in the same way At-Large has adopted the Academy and has really wanted to be behind it.
So that was the thing and the other concern I had was if we just do a presentation in Costa Rica I don't know if it's a good use of time, of face-to-face time doing presentation that could be done online. Face-to-face time for me is better spent being able to discuss things, discuss matters, discuss the future and if we wait until Costa Rica for other SOs and ACs to see this for the first time and to have a better understanding of what it is I'm concerned that we will waste time on questions which have already been dealt with, you know the more trivial stuff was really between Toronto and this.
There's only going to be Prague and Costa Rica and waiting until Prague for amendments and for major discussions to take place is way too late. I think by that time everything will be ready to fly, so we only have the opportunity in Costa Rica to make sure that it's something that everyone really wants and everyone really is happy to take part in. Thank you
Sandra Hoferichter: Thank you Olivier. Why you were speaking I was just looking on the timetable and I see Avri's time constraints, but I also hear your time constraints in terms of not missing the right moment. And I was just thinking and I ask you for your comment for the proposed timeline. If this Program Committee, the small group, can decide on the draft to be submitted to the Working Group by the end of next week then we are on Friday which is the 3rd of February.
Meanwhile ICANN staff can setup a Doodle for the Working Group to schedule the next conference call and then we could submit the first draft to the entire Working Group on the 6th of February which is a Monday and we will still have something like three weeks to discuss or three weeks for discussion.
And I think the curriculum has not been written in stone. It can still be something which is flexible. So, when we have a webinar and we ask the community what do you think, do you have any input to deliver, that there is still enough flexibility to include this on to Costa Rica or in Costa Rica. And then there are still two more weeks to go to Costa Rica, so I think the webinar could be even held at the end of February, something like the 22nd or something, and we would have three weeks to work on. What do you think, especially Avri? I see you all agree accept Wolf. Okay, you agree as well.
Okay, then I will ask Matt now to put this down as an action item not for staff, but for the Working Group and I will repeat the proposed timeline. Avri should just submit what she has, the proposal before Christmas, to this small Program Committee today or tomorrow, just copy and paste in a document, that's it.
And meanwhile Avri will get fellowship material from ICANN staff and we should agree this is the next milestone. We should agree on the draft to be submitted to the working group by the 3rd of February and submit it to the Working Group, the latest on the 6th of February, a Monday. And then we have time to work on this let's say until the 24th of February because a presentation for a webinar could be compiled and curriculum could be added as one or two or even more slides.
And the earliest date for a webinar is then the 22nd, but it shouldn't be later than the 2nd of March because then it's only one week to go to Costa Rica and people might leave early or are busy. Matt, did you understand everything I just said?
Matt Ashtiani: I think so, but due to say the 2nd of March or the 22nd of March?
Sandra Hoferichter: The 2nd of March.
Matt Ashtiani: Okay.
Sandra Hoferichter: The webinar should be earliest, on the 27th of February or the 2nd of March, so in this week.
Matt Ashtiani: If you look in the discussion section of the Adobe Connect I actually typed it out, so if you want to just double check to make sure it that's correct.
Sandra Hoferichter: Olivier you raised your hand?
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Yes Sandra, thank you. It's Olivier for the transcript. I was going to say that I agree with your schedule and also I just wanted to point out that even though we will meet in Costa Rica I think the discussions on the curriculum can continue all the way to Costa Rica and maybe even after. And in fact I think there probably will be happening after depending on the amount of feedback that will be gained face-to-face in Costa Rica. I just want to emphasize making use of the face-to-face time in Costa Rica one face-to-face discussions rather than one way presentations which is a little bit of a waste of face-to-face time. But, certainly the discussion on the curriculum could continue and will probably continue because of all the input that will arrive by that time. Thank you.
Sandra Hoferichter: Absolutely, thank you Olivier. I absolutely agree because to make this to a real community project we also have to be open and flexible for comments made by other constituencies and I think that they will add very valuable comments. So, I think I will figure out the exact timeline for Working Group calls and everything which I just see Heidi mentioned in the chat afterwards via Skype.
We can do this via Skype or in the chat here, but as I look at the time we are now close to two hours and I'd actually like to close this call for this Program Committee. And I'd like to ask under item number six is there any other business, any other things you think should be discussed which were not discussed or anything which was not clear? Any addendums to this call then please tell us now?
I see nothing and I can understand and I thank you very much for your attention and for your engagement, for your participation, and wish you a good rest of the day, a good night, and a good start into the next day. So long.
