Page History

Heidi Ullrich: Heidi.

Operator: Joined.

Sebastien Bachollet: Sebastien.

Operator: Joined.

Sebastien Bachollet: Hello.

Heidi Ullrich: Hi, Sebastien. How are you?

Sebastien Bachollet: Fine. And you?

Heidi Ullrich: I'm fine. Fine. We have a very busy--.

Adigo Operator: Adigo Operator.

Operator: Joined.

Heidi Ullrich: Hi, Sonja (ph).

Adigo Operator: Hello.

Sebastien Bachollet: Hello.

Heidi Ullrich: We have Sebastien on the line. And Cheryl and Alan will be dialing in shortly.

Adigo Operator: And we're dialing out to Fatimata.

Heidi Ullrich: Okay.

Matthias Langenegger: Matthias.

Operator: Joined.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Cheryl.

Operator: Joined.

Heidi Ullrich: Hello, Cheryl. We have Sebastien and Matthias on the line.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay.

Matthias Langenegger: Hi, Cheryl.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Hi. Alan's just winding up the other call. I just said, you know, I've got to go, Alan, and he said, he, he, he. So, he'll be winding up and dialing in shortly, I'm sure.

Heidi Ullrich: Cheryl, Adigo is currently dialing out to Fatimata, but we are wondering whether Vanda requires a dial out. I have been trying to call her all day and she has not been on Skype.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Well, you can go ahead and dial out, I would suggest.

Alan Greenberg: Alan.

Operator: Joined.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Hi, Alan. Sorry to bail on you but, you know.

Alan Greenberg: Thanks for the reminder.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Ah, the wrangling cats.

Operator: Joined.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Wrangling cats. It's always a lot of fun.

Alan Greenberg: Not that meeting, actually.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: What, not fun or not wrangling?

Alan Greenberg: It was not fun.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: No. Heavens, no, as I must say.

Alan Greenberg: I felt like I was playing a game of 1 person against 17.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Oh, come on.

Alan Greenberg: Well, 2 people against 17.

Unidentified Participant: (Inaudible.)

Alan Greenberg: Whoever was speaking, I don't know what you said or who you were.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: I think it was Vanda and it's a really bad line.

Heidi Ullrich: Yes. I think it was Vanda. I'm checking with Adigo.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Either that or she's talking to us from a tornado's center.

Unidentified Participant: (Inaudible.)

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Frieda (ph), it's Fatimata.

Alan Greenberg: I think it's Fatimata, not Vanda.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: That's Fatimata. Hello, Fatimata. Very bad line. We might need to dial out again to Fatimata, I think.

Alan Greenberg: Only if we actually want her – to speak to her.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Well, Alan, yes I do.

Alan Greenberg: Well, exactly. That was the point I was making.

Operator: Left.

Alan Greenberg: Cheryl, all the issues that you haven't answered me, are we gonna discuss on this mail or you just don't want – or you just don't want to talk to me? Not this mail, this meeting I mean.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Alan?

Alan Greenberg: Yes.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: It's not that I don't want to talk to you. I've only just managed to get access to only my mail server mail because it goes into my Google calendar. I can't get into my Google mail. I can't get into a whole lot of things. I've restarted computers, incantations, and you saw that I wasn't online. So, if you've got stuff that's come to my Gmail I can't even see it to respond.

Alan Greenberg: Okay. I will ask you here.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: No, no. I'm just, you know--.

Alan Greenberg: -No, no. I-.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: --Not happy.

Alan Greenberg: I wasn't taking it personally, don't worry. I think we need to allocate a full-time technician to work here.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Well, I'm beginning to think that there's just some gremlin that likes to say, oh, it's – Cheryl's about to take her laptop overseas. Let's make sure that it starts to totally stuff up.

Alan Greenberg: Yeah. You've never heard my generic line about computers?

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Perhaps you should share while we're waiting for Fatimata to come back on.

Alan Greenberg: They are the work of the devil.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Ah.

Alan Greenberg: I have said that many times over. It has proven itself to be true many times over. Not only that, but they are conscious things which do things deliberately to foul things up at the worst possible time.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Well, that's for certain. That is for certain.

Alan Greenberg: Well, I've been involved with computers now for--.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: -A long time-.

Alan Greenberg: --Forty-something years. I can – I don't have enough fingers and toes to count the number of times that a computer or a part of a computer has worked marvelously, for years. And it fails as soon as you announce that you're going to replace it. Or better still, two days before its replacement comes in. It gets back at you. If you're thinking of replacing your laptop, it would stop working, you know. And if you think I'm superstitious and making it up, I can document these things.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay. Alan, do you want to respond – I've now at least got into the At-Large list. Do you want to respond to Siva and say it's very nice that you'd like to continue as an IDN liaison for another year but someone in the ALAC has to make a nomination?

Alan Greenberg: Yes. I hadn't seen that note, but I could do that.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Well, he says, "Hello. I wish to continue as the IDN liaison for another year." My temptation is to write back and go, well, first of all, you're not part of the ALAC and only ALAC can nominate right at the beginning of the letter. But I will resist that temptation. My second response is, does this mean you are also undertaking to self-fund to meetings? But since I give him a greatly difficult time a lot, I prefer it not to come from my pen.

Sebastien Bachollet: And just to let you know, he already approached me to ask me to nominate him.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Oh. Well, at least he understands that someone has to nominate him. That's fine.

Sebastien Bachollet: Okay.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: It's just another example of making it look like he doesn't read what is out there.

Alan Greenberg: I will ask the question. My difficulty is I am planning to nominate somebody else. So, that coming from me may not be the most appropriate.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay. Well--.

Alan Greenberg: --Saying you need – I can, however, point out the self-funding issue.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Or do you – if he's asked Sebastien to consider nominating, what about Sebastien? Can you ask if he, as a non-ALAC member, if he is offering himself as liaison and, if successful in an election, is he able to warrant that he is capable of self-funding?

Sebastien Bachollet: Yeah. Self-funding I can--.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: -Fatimata-.

Sebastien Bachollet: -Self-funding I can-.

Matthias Langenegger: --I – Cheryl, I have no problem asking – answering that question. Asking that question.

Operator: Joined.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay. But is Sebastien going to put him forward as a nominee, it might be better that he's had that opportunity to think that through and respond to Sebastien before he may be pulled into a position to have to withdraw if he changes his mind. And I think that would be an embarrassment we don't need to send to--.

Matthias Langenegger: -Thus, I would suggest that Sebastien defer answering the question until he sees my question. And then he can wait for that answer to that one before-.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: --I'll leave that up to you and Sebastian to work out.

Matthias Langenegger: Okay. Okay.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: But I don't want to have to force him into a withdrawal situation because--.

Matthias Langenegger: --I understand.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Hello, Fatimata. That sounded like a much better line.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: Hello.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Hello, Fatimata. That's better.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: (Inaudible.)

Matthias Langenegger: Is it?

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Oh, maybe not.

Matthias Langenegger: I can't hear her.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: Hello?

Matthias Langenegger: Fatimata--.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: (--Inaudible.)

Matthias Langenegger: Make a longer – say a longer sentence.

Alan Greenberg: Fatimata, are you still there?

Fatimata Seye Sylla: (Inaudible.)

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay. Can you speak a little big longer so we can hear the call quality?

Fatimata Seye Sylla: (Inaudible.)

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Hmm.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: (Inaudible.)

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yes. It is a very poor connection, Fatimata.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: (Inaudible.)

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Are you able to get some connectivity to the ExCom Chat in the Skype channel or not?

Fatimata Seye Sylla: I can't understand.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: No, she can't understand us, either.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: (Inaudible.)

Alan Greenberg: Can you connect to Skype?

Fatimata Seye Sylla: There's no electricity in the car.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Thank you. Thank you. We understand. Good. Okay. Now we know you're in the car--.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: --Electricity went off at 7:30. (Inaudible.)

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yes, we can hear you--.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: (Inaudible.)

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: --And we know you're in the car.

Alan Greenberg: Did she say she has no electricity?

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: In the car, she said.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: In the house.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay. Well, we can't get on to Vanda, so let's get on to our agenda.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: (Inaudible.)

Alan Greenberg: I couldn't understand that.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: (Inaudible.) Hello.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yes, we can hear you, Fatimata, but it is a very bad line.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: And I'm hearing a lot of (inaudible).

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay. We will try and reconnect.

Alan Greenberg: Yeah. Cheryl, I don't know if she said the car or Dakar.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Ah. It could be either, yes.

Alan Greenberg: I think she was saying there's no electricity in the city.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: That's quite – which answers the question that she can't connect in any other way.

Heidi?

Heidi Ullrich: Yes.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Rather than Adigo just calling, can you just see if you can get a direct line without it going through a telephone bridge?

Heidi Ullrich: Okay.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: And establish with her. If it's – if that's a better line, then we might have to go through a human proxy method or we can try with Adigo again. But that call quality is untenable. We will not be able to work. It's not fair for her and it's not fair for us.

Heidi Ullrich: Absolutely. I will try and call her on my mobile. And Adigo is ringing back to her again.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: But she's only got one mobile so only one of you can connect at a time, so--.

Heidi Ullrich: Okay. I'll inform Adigo.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yeah. Just get them to hold and see if we can sort that out.

Heidi Ullrich: Okay. Actually, Adigo's saying that it's clear now, but let me--.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: (Inaudible.)

Heidi Ullrich: I'll take care of it.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Excellent. Thank you.

Alan Greenberg: Cheryl, one of the questions I asked you, which you can give your opinion. You can bring it to the whole ExCom if you wish, was do you have any problem with me naming James Singh (ph) as the IDN liaison, given that his professional business is right now CEO of a company looking at IDN gTLDs? In other words, does that put him at a conflict in discussing IDN ccTLDs?

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: I personally do not have a problem with that, but that's because I come from the Asia-Pacific region and we don't have a problem with all of that.

Alan Greenberg: Okay. I don't have a problem with it. I feel it will simply require making sure that everything is clean and transparent.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yes.

Alan Greenberg: And he has enough professional background that I trust him as an honorable person.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yeah.

Alan Greenberg: So, I will name him, I nominate him. It's just a heads-up that someone might call us on it. So, be prepared with the answers. That's all.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yeah. And thanks for that heads-up. The thing is, though, Alan, I guess, as you said, it really comes back to the ability for people to be able to clearly delineate who they are speaking for and on behalf of what. I think he's (inaudible) IDNs is more on the plus side of the ledger than that is on the negative side of the ledger.

Alan Greenberg: That was my take exactly. I just wanted to make sure you were supporting that.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yep. Sebastien, what's your take on that?

Sebastien Bachollet: Well, I agree with you. We don't – we need to be careful. But in the same time, we need people who know about that and then it's quite a difficult subject and somebody knowing it's better. But you have to be clear that he needs to come back to us, ALAC, before he makes any statements. Because the risk is that he knows so well that he will answer before even we think about it.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yes.

Sebastien Bachollet: But I have no problem with that.

Matthias Langenegger: Yeah. I would say he needs to come to us before making formal statements. He will be making statements and we're going to have to instruct him generally and trust him.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: And that's one of the advantages of him being part of the ALAC at the same time.

Matthias Langenegger: Yeah.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Because it gives clear accountability and he's – the expectation is that he'll be far more intimately and regularly involved and knows what it means to be making a statement on behalf of the ALAC. And coming from the IETF background that he does, he should understand those rigors and requirements very well.

Alan Greenberg: I have no problem with it and it will be done.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Excellent.

Okay, have we got Fatimata back in?

Fatimata Seye Sylla: Yes.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Ah, that's beautiful. So, you have no power.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: Hello?

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Hello. You have no power?

Fatimata Seye Sylla: Yes, I'm--.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: --No electricity.

Okay. On to our agenda, then. We haven't had any success getting Vanda, although I think that we might try once or twice again through the call.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: Yeah.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Starting at the top of the agenda we need to look at the follow-up action items from the 22nd of September. I believe most of those have been done, but let's go through them. Statement on the SSAC, yes. Document publication, operation policy. We need to actually look at, under that agenda item because we're having our meeting today so that we can do something by the 8th of October. And the vertical integration, which we're going to be discussing in Seoul. What – I don't think we need to do any action on that today, though. What's your view, Sebastien and Alan? I notice that Vanda has just come online.

Alan Greenberg: On vertical integration, I am not prepared to do anything. I said I would lead a discussion in Seoul and I will have sent out some links before that. It is not a clean subject. There are strong opinions on both sides. Must of it is emotion. I'm not gonna be surprised if we do not come to a formal ALAC position, other than saying we are divided. But I think we should consider the issue and try to look at the two sides, as it were.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yep.

Alan Greenberg: But I'm not prepared to talk about it today.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: I think that that's really very much for Seoul, not for us here today, other than saying we do need to do it in Seoul. Sebastien, your view?

Sebastien Bachollet: Yeah. I think we don't need to discuss that today, but we have to ask I guess staff because it's very difficult to follow all the (inaudible) I am not about to, but I know that these discussions happen in the LACRALO list. I don't know for the other. It may happen on day in EURALO, but not yet. And I know not for NARALO, but I guess that they are discussing that and I don't know for the two others. Then it's important to come to Seoul with what – at least we need to know and discuss the ExCom, what it's already discussed within the RALO list on that subject.

Alan Greenberg: Okay. I will point out that much of the stuff that has discussed on some of the RALO lists is not necessarily accurate. And I am as guilty as any for putting out things which turned out to be not quite accurate in terms of facts, although they were in terms of intent. And we – and I have not yet looked at what is in the draft applicant guidebook at this point to see what the ICANN position is. And it may well have moved in one direction or another since the last one.

So, I think the things that have to be brought to the attention of the ALAC and to At-Large are what the current draft applicant guidebook says, number one. And number two, what the proponents on both sides are saying at this point and have some level of discussion and see whether there's clear unanimity, which I doubt, or if there's a strong preference on one side or very divided. And I think that's what we're gonna come out with.

Sebastien Bachollet: Yeah. My point was that during the – after there was some discussion on the NARALO and in the general list, ALAC list or all those lists, they were starting discussion within the LACRALO. And it's maybe something we need to take and sort out.

Alan Greenberg: Yeah. And there was a very significant discussion on NARALO, including strong statements from some of the registrars and registries who are taking opposite sides in this.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yeah. Yeah, indeed. I was just wondering, Fatimata, has there been any discussion at the AFRALO meeting or on the list? And if so – or if not, will you and – well, perhaps it's too early for Dave, but Mohamed's not coming to Seoul. So, will you be able to bring some views to the table when we discuss this in Seoul?

Alan, I'm away from my computer. Can you – or Sebastien – can you see if she's dropped off? I'm not looking at Adigo at the moment.

Alan Greenberg: Sorry, I wasn't on that screen.

Heidi Ullrich: I will ask Adigo.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Thanks, Heidi. I mean, she just might be on mute, but--.

Sebastien Bachollet: Sorry--.

Alan Greenberg: -I don't have access to an Adigo screen so I don't-.

Sebastien Bachollet: No, so do I--.

Alan Greenberg: --I can't tell that at all.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: Cheryl, (inaudible), can you hear me?

Alan Greenberg: Yes.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yes. Thank you, Fatimata. I was worried we'd lost you.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: No.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: The vertical integration question. We will be discussing it in Seoul. We've heard that EURALO hasn't dealt with it on the list yet, but perhaps will be. And LACRALO and NARALO have. I was wondering if AFRALO has or has not. If not, is it possible, seeing as Mohamed is not coming to Seoul, Dave is very new, if you might be able to come to Seoul with some information from AFRALO on their views on integration with registry?

Fatimata Seye Sylla: Okay. This is not – we're having a meeting tomorrow and this wasn't on the agenda.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Hmm. It might be--.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: Yeah. But maybe we can try to discuss this and have a view for Seoul. This is very – you know, very short time then.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yes. You might need to encourage some loose discussion then.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: Yeah. But we (inaudible) talk about this. We'll try to talk about it because we have a lot of items on the agenda for tomorrow.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yeah.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: But we'll try to have a view, an AFRALO view on this if we have the time. Otherwise, we'll try to discuss it online.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yes.

Alan Greenberg: I would think you're better off trying to do it online. I know that's difficult.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: Yeah.

Alan Greenberg: But it's really something which you need to have looked at the documents first, because--.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: -Yeah-.

Alan Greenberg: --Some of the statements that have been made on both sides are not quite accurate. And it's easy to have a discussion about wrong statements.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yeah.

Alan Greenberg: It's a lot more challenging to base it on facts.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: Yeah.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: That's a very good point, Alan. What might be useful, then, Fatimata and Heidi, to some extent, with the regional meetings between now and Seoul is under the agenda items, if they're still in existence on the regional meetings about the Seoul agenda, that any of these ones that we're going to be speaking substantially to in Seoul, get some list exchanges going on. And it may be that some regions might actually want to, you know, make a formal briefing statement and others will be dialing in and putting in their input at the time we have our meetings.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: Cheryl, it's not very clear for me what you just said.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Sorry.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: Yeah. Can you hear me?

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: I can hear you. Heidi, do you want to repeat what I said in a more semblance of English so – just in case (inaudible).

Heidi Ullrich: Yes. Fatimata, what she – Cheryl has said is that, for the RALO meetings between now and Seoul, if we could encourage the RALOs and the ALSes to talk about some of the key issues, the policy issues that will be discussed in Seoul and that the RALOs need to bring their region's perspectives to Seoul.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: Yeah. Yeah. If she's talking about the (inaudible), we talked yesterday, we talked about it yesterday and--.

Heidi Ullrich: Oh. Yes. The issue of the director, the process for the selection of the director would be one. But she's also, I believe, speaking about the current policy issues that are open for public comment.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: Yeah. Okay. I agree.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Alright. Fantastic. But since you're the only interface--.

Vanda Scartezini: (Inaudible.)

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Go, Vanda. Yes, Vanda.

Vanda Scartezini: No. It's just, in the LACRALO, we just ask to Andres to have a connection with all the group and (inaudible) to have some feedback from the people here.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Um-hum. Okay.

Heidi Ullrich: Cheryl, this is Heidi.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yes. Go ahead, Heidi.

Heidi Ullrich: Just a very quick point that several of the RALOs, LACRALO, EURALO, who are having meetings in Seoul have decided not to hold their October meetings. So, I will go ahead and contact the chairs and the secretaries to encourage the list discussion for these issues.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay. I'm just trying to capture that in our – I think our (inaudible) I spelt Seoul with an "I." That's a little bit exciting. Okay. All typos are my own. Okay.

Just going through the action items. The Seoul agenda we can deal with separately. Policy working group. Beau was asked if he would lead the RAA Registrant Rights Charter and that did happen. So, Alan doesn't need to assume that role.

And that brings me back to the matter of ExCom. Staff will send ExCom an overview of the ALAC statements where translations requested, etc., etc. We got that. I haven't done a single thing with it, but we need to before the 8th. Would have to do with the document publication operational policy. Do you want me to simply send, as we discussed last time, to the public comments the synthesis document based on what staff has sent us, or have you all not had time to look at that yet?

Sebastien Bachollet: It's Sebastien. I have time and I answer. And I tell you that yesterday was a conference call of the board committee on the public participation and I insist on the translation question and I took some part of the document. And I think it's important to send it for the 8th and it's also important to participate during the Seoul meeting to the board committee meeting on the public participation. And I should say that I was willing to participate at this meeting.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Excellent. Thank you. But we're happy to send the synthesis documents with an introductory paragraph pointing out the importance of things like translation. Is that everyone's view? Alan?

Alan Greenberg: I certainly support that. I haven't looked at the statement, the rest of the statement, but I support the need for translation.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay. Vanda, your view?

Vanda Scartezini: Yes. Yeah. Yeah. I saw that.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay. Fatimata, I assume coming from a world where translations are important into French, you would agree with that?

Fatimata Seye Sylla: Yes.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay. Alright. Well, I'll work on an introductory part and we'll make sure that goes out by the 8th. That's what the ExCom has been instructed to do or what we've been instructed to do from the ALAC anyway, so – and we're not having – I don't think there's any need to vote because it's a synthesis document of things we've previously stated. You're all happy with that? In which case, let's move off. Unless I've missed anything, that should be all of our action items. Does anyone see that I've missed anything? Okay. If not, we want to now move on to the PAD, the Policy Advice Development calendar.

There's a couple of things that have been added between our meeting now and our last meeting. And we do need, I believe, to put some dates into those. Is that not the case, Heidi?

Heidi Ullrich: I believe that Matthias has added these. But yes, we do have several new public comments that we need to discuss whether you would like to add those.

Matthias Langenegger: Heidi, this is Matthias. Actually, we do need to add a couple of dates. If you go to the PAD, I think it's linked to the agenda page for today's meeting, you will see that a couple of statements have TBD and we should define dates for those statements.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: So, can you just help us through which ones have got the TBD so we can scroll down quickly? I've got bylaw changes to improve accountability. Just make sure I've got them all. Documentation, public operation policy, the one we just spoke on. The draft statement due date is the 8th, so the draft – I mean, we're doing that now. I don't think that should have been TBD but, anyway, it doesn't matter. Post expiry domain name recovery needs to be the SSAC retreat agenda and the initial report of the geographic working review, which actually has closed. So, why they've still got TBD next to them is a bit of a mystery. What else do we need to do? The integration. (Inaudible) one we've just discussed they put TBD?

Heidi Ullrich: Yes.

Alan Greenberg: I would suggest that we delete the SSAC retreat agenda because this has already passed.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yep. Works for me.

Sebastien Bachollet: It's Sebastien. I have – one way is to delete it. The other way is to put it somewhere because I think it's also important to keep track on what we do. And one day somebody will ask us and if we delete it, we lose the information. Then I would suggest that we put it somewhere with all the good information and we keep track on that.

Matthias Langenegger: (Inaudible.)

Sebastien Bachollet: And my second point is – yeah?

Matthias Langenegger: Just on the – you see that there are different tabs to this document. And one of the tabs says "Adopted Statements." And that's where I put all the statements that have been sent to public consultation or the board. Now, in that case, there was no statement for the SSAC Retreat Agenda. So, would you still want me to keep the record?

Sebastien Bachollet: Yes. I remember well, Patrick, and Cheryl sent something to – about this subject.

Matthias Langenegger: Oh, did you?

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yes. Patrick, we put in a support document. It was a one paragraph that said, yes, we think a retreat's a good idea. We like--.

Matthias Langenegger: Okay. Okay. So, I will add it to that section then.

Sebastien Bachollet: And my other point is that Improving Institutional Confidence - Way Forward, and the Proposed Bylaw Change To Improve Accountability, I guess is the same thing, more or less, how it was put together. And the document I produced I sent to the working group and then I sent to ALAC and now it's in front of ALAC is done. And it's not TBD; it's done. Now we have to decide if somebody wants to read it and make comments on my proposal. If not, we have to put it on vote.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yes. And is that – that's actually the discussion about how we put it on to comment and vote today. So, we can certainly change that to – what was it, late last week or early this week you said--?

Sebastien Bachollet: Yeah. I can't tell you the date, not by heart, but I can find out that and give it to Matthias to put it under (inaudible).

Matthias Langenegger: I'm sorry, Sebastien. You say improvement to the public consultation process and the proposed bylaw changes is actually the same statement--?

Sebastien Bachollet: -No. Improving Institutional Confidence - Way Forward-

Matthias Langenegger: --Oh, I'm sorry. Improving Institutional Confidence. Okay. Got it.

Sebastien Bachollet: Because it was just one part or one consequence of that to become a bylaw change.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yes.

Sebastien Bachollet: And the same document where we comment the IIC - Way Forward put by the staff. We also commented the bylaw change proposal.

Matthias Langenegger: So, you're suggestion is that it would go on to the public consultation on the proposed bylaw changes, right? Because this one's still open.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yeah. What he's saying is the IIC-Way Forward document, alright, which is now under a public consultation date, a subset of that is the proposed bylaw changes.

Matthias Langenegger: Okay.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: And that the documentation he's put out, and it should now be going for comment review in our community, will those dates need to go in the line under the Proposed Bylaw Changes to Improve Accountability.

Matthias Langenegger: Okay.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: And Sebastien, your dates of last week or whatever, can just be plugged in there, yes?

Sebastien Bachollet: Yes.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay. Matthias, what other dates do you need from us?

Matthias Langenegger: Well, the Post-Expiration Domain Name Recovery, that one ended on the 10th. And I'm not quite sure what has been done on that document, if there has been a draft statement or – I haven't seen anything, so--.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: -Alan, we did not make a draft statement or comment-.

Alan Greenberg: --We did not. We initiated the process and we did not make an additional statement.

Matthias Langenegger: Okay. So, would you like me to delete this?

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Well, again, we don't need to delete it because it's ongoing work, which brings me back to that point that Sebastien was making, which is the difference between a tracking of milestone dates for policy development process and statements being developed, which is what this document's doing very well and is very important. But we need to ensure that some things get marked off as ongoing work group activities or that we will be revisiting them at the next point. The same can be said for the Geographic Regions Review. Where it says initial report of Geographic Regions Review, what we'd have to be saying is just Geographic Region Review work group and Post-Expiry Domain Name Recovery work group. And we can note in our column next to each of those, in the example of the initial report of Geographic Regions line, it will be "Initial report closed. Briefing held." And ALAC dates then for the interim report is what will be going in on that line next. Because in fact, the interaction in policy development and comments or something like one of those work groups is going to have several stages; probably at least three, if not four. And it would be useful to track all of those.

Did I capture that properly? Is that what you were talking about, Sebastien?

Sebastien Bachollet: Yep. Great.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Alan, you run one of those work groups. Do you think that's--?

Alan Greenberg: Yeah. Sorry, I was just trying to actually load this table, which took forever to come up. Do we want to also be tracking the things that we decide not to do, like the IRTP one where Garreth made a recommendation that we do not need to comment on that?

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: I think we should.

Alan Greenberg: Do we want a tracking or a historic record that we consciously decided not to comment on it?

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: I support that. I think that's important. Because this PAD document is a hugely, hugely useful tool. And it's one that I think should have archival as well as current. Yes, so thing – you might have be scrolling down quite a long shopping list, but you can see why we did or did not take something in a certain direction.

Matthias Langenegger: Oh, Cheryl, maybe we can just have different tabs. One tab that tracks all the ongoing public statements and then another tab which sort of has the function of an archive, where you can just track past statements.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yes. And that would be fine. And that would pick up the lead. And things where you've got work groups, which is currently Post-Expire Domain Name Recovery, Geographic Regions. We'll also be adding the SSAC IRT to that because ALAC is a named party to that. And to be honest, we probably should be putting the IDNs issue in that category as well because we've got representation in the PDD process for the ccPLD IDNs at the moment. They probably, you know, are leading lines under work groups.

So, it's an option for you to finesse this a little bit. I don't think we should spend much more time finessing it now, but I'm wondering if this could be a useful piece of work for the ExCom to do in our face-to-face meeting in Seoul, where we could all be (inaudible)--.

Alan Greenberg: --As long as we can do it without spending a lot of time on it.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yes.

Alan Greenberg: We could get carried away and spend three hours trying to dot the i's on this and I don't think that's what we need to do face to face.

Heidi Ullrich: Well, perhaps--.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: --Right. I think Matthias has got the general concept of a couple of tabs and how we'd like to finesse this document up a bit. And we can do some – an outcome agreement stuff (inaudible) on making those changes.

Matthias Langenegger: Well, yeah. Maybe I can present something to you at the ExCom meeting in Seoul.

Heidi Ullrich: That's exactly what I was going to say to both Cheryl and Matthias.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Heidi, as usual, knows exactly what we need to do. Thank you, my dear. Excellent.

Heidi Ullrich: Okay. So, that's an action item. Matthias, we can talk about that after.

Matthias Langenegger: Okay.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay.

Sebastien Bachollet: May I--.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: So, is there anything else we need to do on the PAD now?

Sebastien Bachollet: Yeah. I just would like to – on the proposed bylaw change, I would like to have – if it's possible to have the vote prior to Seoul. I know that we have up to the 27 of November, but if ALAC can come during the Seoul meeting with some agreed point, it will be there for some discussion. As a draft statement due date was – it was sent the 22 of September and we opened the IL (ph) consultation at that time. We can put to middle of October the closer of the consultation and then to have one week to vote. And it could be done prior to the travel to Seoul. It would be great.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yes. Yes. I have no problem with those dates. Fatimata, Vanda and Alan? Your views?

Vanda Scartezini: Yeah, yeah, yeah. It's a very good idea.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Alan?

Alan Greenberg: Yeah.

Matthias Langenegger: Okay. Can I suggest October 15th for the start of the vote and October 22nd for the closing. Okay.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Perfect.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: Okay.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Excellent. Okay.

Vanda Scartezini: Okay.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: So, nothing else on the PAD?

Heidi Ullrich: Well, Cheryl, do you wish to discuss which new public comments you wish – you would like to add to that?

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Well, not so much a public comment, but another work group will be the SSAC IRD work group, which is your Internationalized Registry Data one. What else in – I'm just trying got move to the public comment part. What else have we not catched (ph) there?

Heidi Ullrich: I'm just going to read them down. Version three of the new gTLD applicant guidebook. That ends the 22nd of November.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: We definitely will be putting that in the PAD, yes.

Heidi Ullrich: Absolutely. Proposed rights protection mechanism in new gTLDs ends 22nd of November.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Sorry, Heidi.

Heidi Ullrich: Yes.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Can I just ask you and/or Alan what nexus does that have with the current work group activities on registrant rights?

Alan Greenberg: I'm sorry. I missed what Heidi said.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: It's the--.

Heidi Ullrich: (Inaudible.)

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Sorry. The proposed rights protection mechanism in new gTLDs. It is open for comment.

Alan Greenberg: Maybe I'm not familiar with that one at all. Tell me what that is.

Heidi Ullrich: I'm reading from the website and it's a set of implementation recommendations related to intellectual property protections for the new gTLD program.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: It's a subset of new gTLDs. It's basically our IRI IRC work. I think the answer is, yes, it needs to go on as a separate one.

Alan Greenberg: I think so.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: And it is yet another situation where they – this divide and conquer aspect seems to be the way of going forward. One would have thought that there should be a clear nexus between the activity of this process and the activity of the current GNSO work group activities in this area, but it's (inaudible)--.

Alan Greenberg: --If this process is Evan's effort to try to do IRT related things, intellectual property related things, I don't think there's hardly any overlap.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: No, this is – well, this is a public comment call. It started on the 5th of October by ICANN.

Alan Greenberg: Okay.

Matthias Langenegger: Yeah.

Alan Greenberg: Let me look at that because I am obviously trying to--.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: -Okay. It says receiving recommendations from the IRT and others, taking extensive comment and conducting consultations with the broad community, ICANN staff have drafted a set of-.

Alan Greenberg: -Okay-.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: --Implementation recommendations related to intellectual property protection for the new gTLD program. The proposed rights mechanisms are: the creation of the IP Clearinghouse – I'm summarizing here – which includes Sunrise processes during TLD launch and the creation of a uniform rapid suspension process for use in clear-but, blatant cases of trademark infringement.

Now, we made comments and had discussions in Sydney and aspects of our opinions were integrated into our joint statement on both of those matters. We should be making some sort of comment before the 22nd of November on it. But it also should involve, I would have thought, the current IRT working group as well, in which case I'm suggesting it does need to go onto the PAD.

Alan Greenberg: Yes, it does need to go onto the PAD. Yes, I would think the current IRT working group is the one who would be drafting something.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay.

Alan Greenberg: So, essentially, this is extracting the IRT, the intellectual property related things out of the new draft applicant guidebook and having a specific comment period on this.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Correct.

Alan Greenberg: Okay. Then there's no way we cannot comment.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: And we will be discussing it in Seoul.

Alan Greenberg: Yes.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: The next one that opened on the 5th of October is – correct me if I'm wrong, Heidi – NomCom review?

Heidi Ullrich: Yes, that's correct. The draft working group report. I'm putting that into the Skype in just a moment.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Do we – I mean, we have an integral part of NomCom. I think it would be disastrous not to comment on a NomCom review, but that's just my biased view. What does everyone else think? Vanda? Alan? You guys came from there.

Alan Greenberg: I have not looked at the report. Unless it is so watered down as to be meaningless, I do not think we can not comment on it. But that means we must formulate the comment in Seoul, no later than.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Indeed, because it closes on the 4th of November. So, that has to go onto--.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: I believe that we should (inaudible) so at least (inaudible) before Seoul.

Alan Greenberg: I agree completely. If we go into Seoul not having read it, we're in trouble.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: Yeah.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Oh, yes.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: It's not worth it.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: We've got to start this sooner, rather than later.

Alan Greenberg: I will dare say, regardless of what it says, there will be divided opinion in ALAC and At-Large, given the continued divided opinion on the presence and importance of presence of NomCom participants.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: That of course will be variable from different regions.

Alan Greenberg: Yes.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: Yeah. And that's--.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Go ahead.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: I think that's something we used to. And there's always different opinions when it comes to NomCom. And again, as Cheryl just said, it depends on the regions. The regions like AFRALO, we love to have NomCom in the meetings.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: As does APRALO.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: Yeah. I don't know about the other RALOs.

Alan Greenberg: Yeah. I don't think I was saying something startling. It's just that we're not likely to have unanimity; therefore, we should be prepared to present both sides.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: Yeah. I agree.

Vanda Scartezini: Yeah. (Inaudible.)

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yeah. Heidi, I think this comes back to what we were saying earlier about this is one of those things that our people need to come to Seoul, both the regional leadership and the ALAC reps need to come as well, obviously, if they're NomCom. But the ALAC and the regional leadership need to come to Seoul ready, briefed and willing to have a discussion and create output on this topic.

Heidi Ullrich: Okay. I will make a note of that.

Alan Greenberg: And which means, to the extent there are upcoming RALO meetings before Seoul, it should be at least brought to their attention at those meetings.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay. To some extent, this sort of has a nexus with I think what we need to do, and that's put out a set of care and feeding – on your way to Seoul, via members, seeing as ICANN's paying for you to go, here is what you will be discussing when you get here, substantively. Please make sure that you bring your regional views with you.

Heidi Ullrich: So, a homework or reading list for them.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Hmm. I think a (inaudible) list would be very good because, I don't know about everyone else, but I tire of having to go back to reading the documents when we're in the middle of a meeting. Sebastien, you happy with that?

Alan Greenberg: I guess we need to pray for boring movies on the flights.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Well, the other things is, of course, we have the significant advantage that there's always the – and make sure that the At-Large structures and regional memberships of the RALO know at what point in the agenda, in the Seoul agenda, these things are going to be discussed and they could also be encouraged to join in remotely.

Heidi Ullrich: So, Cheryl, I'm just writing into the ExCom that this is an action item. Is that correct?

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Um-hmm. Yeah. And so, the probably needs to go out during the following week.

Sebastien Bachollet: I agree with that and if we--.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: --(Inaudible) our final agenda. Go ahead, Alan.

Alan Greenberg: That was Sebastien.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Oh, sorry. Sebastien, (inaudible).

Sebastien Bachollet: I agree with that. I just want – just to add if there is those that comments existing in other language, it will be great to have it in our read list, also.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: Suspended.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Of course, the point that (inaudible), Sebastien, that we will have to make, and we will need to do that in part of our general advice, a piece of advice to the board or a report to the board after the Seoul meeting, but also in the public participation meetings which, as you said, we absolutely must be involved in, is again, you know, these have all come out on the 5th of October, at the last possible legal minute, for discussion closing immediately after the Seoul meeting. I think we should look at how many of them came out in the UN languages or not.

Alan Greenberg: And note how much time was given for them, given that we're not supposed to be counting the ICANN meeting itself.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yes. I just think we need to do a little audit on this.

Alan Greenberg: My understanding is, if they came out on the 5th and they want comments on the 4th, that is essentially four weeks.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Um-hmm.

Alan Greenberg: One month, assuming no one is actually traveling to Seoul or working at Seoul. I thought we had a promise that wouldn't happen ever again.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: I think we need to remind them of that in our public participation interchange.

Alan Greenberg: Didn't we already ask for a reminder a week or two ago?

Sebastien Bachollet: Um-hmm.

Alan Greenberg: I think Nick took it away as something on a to-do list, but I'm not – I may not be correct about that.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: We decided previously not to make comments on SSAC review. There is now the draft working group report. That was on the charter. There was little point, you know, in us making it on the charter. We really need to ask our SSAC liaison on this matter, do we not?

Alan Greenberg: I would think that's a good first step. I think somebody else should – at least someone else should read it, also.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Alright. Who has that joy?

Alan Greenberg: Do we have any SSAC wannabes?

Sebastien Bachollet: It's Patrick's work.

Alan Greenberg: No, no. I understand. But is there anyone else on ALAC who has an interest in that? I mean Patrick, to some extent, is an insider.

Sebastien Bachollet: And so we can ask a previous ALAC member, a (inaudible) member of the SSAC to read it first. (Laughs.)

Alan Greenberg: No.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Sebastien, you're being very naughty today, aren't you.

Sebastien Bachollet: No. But yeah--.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: (Inaudible.)

Sebastien Bachollet: Maybe we can ask – I know that somebody from the RALO is very interested in those issues of security and maybe we can ask – I can ask him to read it and give me his feedback. I really don't have enough time myself to read it. But I was thinking about Lutz – I don't know his name.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Well, now, Lutz actually is a perfect choice. But it leads me to the statement I was about to make, Sebastien, and that was what we should do is ask Patrick to review it, specifically in his role, and advise us do we need to put it into a PAD process or not; specifically in his role as our SSAC liaison. But the work group, the summit work group on security and stability, which includes Lutz and I think four or five others, is the place we should also direct it to.

Sebastien Bachollet: Yeah.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Because that's the standing--.

Sebastien Bachollet: --I believe there is (inaudible) Lutz, yeah.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yeah. Yeah. And Lutz been coming clearly in that way.

Sebastien Bachollet: Yeah.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: So, that's an action item that we're sending out to Patrick, his advice to us on requirement for comment or otherwise. Our guess is probably yes. And his reaching out into the standing work group for them to read and review and also get back to us with advice and comments. And he needs to come in and give us some timings.

Board review is the next one; again, a 5 October, 4th of November.

Vanda Scartezini: Yes.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: And I would think we should be making at this final report stage some comment.

Vanda Scartezini: Yeah.

Alan Greenberg: May I suggest on all of these ones with a four-week period, including the Seoul meeting, that we immediately put in a request for extension? For all intents and purposes, people are away for two weeks, close to two weeks on – related to the ICANN meeting. I would request a two-week extension on both, if the Chair so wishes.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: The Chair's always happy to put in for extensions if there's been clearly required. And I would think this is a very good excuse for them to be required. What do you think, however? First of all Vanda, then Fatimata then Sebastien. Vanda, your view on that?

Vanda Scartezini: Well, I would (inaudible) that we could extend this period. So, I suggest we in some way finalize and just, you know, make a find, you know, a small change giving until Seoul to have (inaudible) for 4 of November.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay.

Vanda Scartezini: I then believe that they will have, you know, intention to extend this period to not to close (inaudible).

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Hmm. Fair point. Fatimata?

Fatimata Seye Sylla: Well, if it's not feasible, if you can't have it extended then we don't have a choice. But if we have a choice, I would go for an extension.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay.

Matthias Langenegger: I think we should at least go on the record of asking for it.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay. And the draft final report is going to be presented at the Seoul meeting. So, we will in fact have a work group and public discussion opportunity during the Seoul meeting.

Vanda Scartezini: Great. Yeah. I wish that – we should have feedback from Wendy about what's going on inside the board, what is the intention they may have to close this debate or not.

Sebastien Bachollet: We may ask our liaison, Roberto Gaetano, maybe.

Vanda Scartezini: Maybe. Anyone, yeah. Someone--.

Sebastien Bachollet: --Sorry. It was another naughty.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yes. Yeah, Sebastien, you are being very naughty but, in fact you make me smile, which is always a very good thing.

Alan Greenberg: I think we need to go on record as commending Sebastien for his naughtiness.

Heidi Ullrich: Is that an action item, Alan?

Alan Greenberg: No. I think we just do it and erase it from the record.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay. While we recognize that our community leaders will be part of this activity in the Seoul meeting, we need – it's another one of those we need to raise the regional awareness and the ALS awareness about. We will be putting something in. We will flag that, during our Seoul meeting, we may be needing to ask for a two-week extension. So, we'll give the board a heads-up and we'll put that through as an advisory note to (inaudible) in the usual way. And obviously, Vanda, you'll be carrying this from the close of the Seoul meeting--.

Vanda Scartezini: -Perfect. Yeah-.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: --So, it's gonna be (inaudible) you and we'll send it to – who's in charge – oh, Marco is. So, we'll make sure Marco gets that as well.

Can you make that an action item for me, too, in that letter please, Heidi? But we'll put in the dates for the running 5 to 4, with a parenthesized possible 7 to 14 day extension or – well, actually, 14-day extension may be required.

Sebastien Bachollet: Yeah. I want just to add that some parts require – will require some bylaw change. And then the question of language to be shared by the members of the At-Large community. It's important.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Sure. I think that will be a standing byline in just about every comment we put in for everything in the next 12 months.

Sebastien Bachollet: Yeah. Yeah, yeah. Sure.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: And I have no problem with that.

We have the privacy and property service, domain names registered using a privacy or proxy service comment period. It started on the 2nd of October, runs to the 6th of November. I would have thought this should be sort of farmed off into the wonderful world of WhoIs, should it not?

Alan Greenberg: Not--.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: -The explanation-. Sorry, go ahead, Alan.

Alan Greenberg: Yeah. Again, I haven't read it but I would think that it has WhoIs implications, but also registrant right applications.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Hmm.

Alan Greenberg: I mean, there are those people who say privacy is a right, or at least an optional – a right that they should be able to opt for. So, I don't think it's purely a WhoIs issue. But I haven't read the report so I don't know. But simply saying its WhoIs is not – I don't think covers the whole thing.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: But we only – we have an existing WhoIs work group.

Alan Greenberg: Okay.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Just as we put it – the SSAC stuff to our liaison and its work group, I think we should be putting this to our new, to-be-established WhoIs liaison and work group. But we also need to put it on the PAD for a whole of committee--.

Alan Greenberg: There's no question it has to be on the PAD. Okay. Sorry.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yeah. Okay. So, that has to come into our homework then, I think. And then the question is, do we need to do anything on the couple of root scaling studies? My suggestion is not unless someone really convinces us that we need to, but that's just me! I think it – if it is going to happen, the most important of the two is the report, which has an awful lot of issues fitting into exactly what we're interested in, ranging from IDNs to DNSSEC to IPv6. We should certainly put some sort of response into that.

Sebastien Bachollet: And I guess we have the team to do that and--.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: --Yeah.

Sebastien Bachollet: And we don't have to – we are not asking Alan to do something in addition to what he's already doing.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yeah.

Sebastien Bachollet: And we can ask those people to work for us.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yeah. Should we marry the TNA report and the root scaling study together? They are different--.

Sebastien Bachollet: -Yes-.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: --But I think if we ask them to be married together and hie that off to SSAC and the Security and Stability work group, that's actually good because it gives them something to put their teeth into.

Sebastien Bachollet: Yes.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: That's again Lutz, Olivier, Holly; you know, people who should be okay doing that.

Sebastien Bachollet: Yep.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay. And then I think we're up to – is there any more that we need to pull in? Have I missed one, Heidi?

Heidi Ullrich: Well, I'm looking still for the newer ones. And we have the Expedited Registry Security Request.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Oh, God. Oh. I'm coiling away from my screen!

Matthias Langenegger: That one's due November 1st.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: I'm not convinced that we need to actually make a comment on that. But we could ask--.

Sebastien Bachollet: -No-.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: --Our SSAC liaison.

Sebastien Bachollet: Yeah. We could just--.

Alan Greenberg: I would think that's one of those that, unless people – again, I haven't read it so I don't really know. I would think this is one that somebody read it and say it sounds like a good idea and that we put a positive statement in.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay.

Alan Greenberg: Without a lot of work. Someone actually has to read it, though, before we can do that, make that position.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Well, again, I think that's very much a Patrick job and a warm fuzzy. So, let's put it into the PAD with a query warm fuzzy comment.

Alan Greenberg: My understanding of that one is it puts into formal process the kinds of things that were done for the confiker worm.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yes.

Alan Greenberg: Problem. And I think that gets our unqualified blessing.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay. And (inaudible)--.

Alan Greenberg: -And I think we should go on record as saying that-.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: --Is always a good thing. But it has to be a contractual waiver therefore.

Alan Greenberg: Yeah.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yep.

Alan Greenberg: I think it's a no – I think it's probably a no-brainer, but I think we should put in a quick statement on it.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay.

Alan Greenberg: The cover sheet will be longer than the statement.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yep. That's fine. And I'm quite sure that – so really, Patrick, we've got a few things to point down to Patrick now.

Alan Greenberg: We do.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: And the Security and Stability working group, which is not a bad thing.

Nothing else on the PAD then?

Heidi Ullrich: I think that covers it.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Whew.

Heidi Ullrich: Yeah. Yeah.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: I think that we do need to make an action item into our ALAC meeting at the Seoul (inaudible) ICANN meeting that we do have, following up from Seoul, a little letter written to the board and to the public participation committee with whatever analysis we do on this flurry of pre-Seoul requests of the community, recommending that such an influx be avoided in the future, again, wherever possible. And again, we'd be putting in the translation as well.

Alan Greenberg: Some of these, one could say, are urgent. But in fact, three of them are reviews which go on forever anyway. One is proxy, which has gone on forever and will, probably. And the other is the expedited registry one, which maybe is warranted. But three – four out of the five, it's hard to say why they have to be done by the 5th of November.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yeah. All coming out on the same day, all closing almost at the same time and running over a meeting.

Alan Greenberg: Yep.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: It needs to be said. It needs to be said again. It needs to be said in the five different languages. In fact, what we might do this time is send in our comment on that in as many translated interpreters (inaudible).

Alan Greenberg: (Laughing.)

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: I'm thinking maybe 40, 45. Forty-two. Forty-two is a good number. I've always had a fondness for the number 42. Thank you Douglas Adams. Yes, I think we might try to put some of our comments in around 42 languages just to make the point. I just don't want Sebastien to be the only naughty one today.

Alan Greenberg: I'm in the process of suggesting that this issue of multiple comment period is running over ICANN's be mentioned in the GNSO meeting this Thursday.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Good. Because it really isn't fair or reasonable--.

Alan Greenberg: -It's not up to me to put it on the agenda, but-.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Hmm. No, that's good. Thanks, Alan. That'd be good.

Alright. Next. Oh, gee. We've got this little meeting at the end of this week, this little teleconference that's called a community call on the process to select an At-Large Director. The (inaudible) on our agenda is clearly it's gonna be really important that we're all on that call. And not just us but as many of our regional reps and people or, if not, we need to be able to proxy for them.

Why I wanted to raise it on today's agenda is two-fold. First of all, we have a number of questions and some discussion going on both on lists and in the wiki space.

Alan Greenberg: Is there any on the – is there some on the list, other than notices of wiki postings?

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Not--.

Alan Greenberg: Okay.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Not other than saying we could be doing this on the list.

Alan Greenberg: Okay. Well, there was--.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: --I don't know – to my knowledge there has been some correspondence in at least the LACRALO list.

Matthias Langenegger: And there has been in the NARALO list, I believe.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yes. So, it's not the At-Large list as such, but the original list.

Alan Greenberg: Okay.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: What I'd like to propose to the ExCom is that we run a fairly similar process as we did with the last community call for the board liaison. And that is that we call for questions in the Adobe space that we'll be using, but we re-visit those comments. And I've been asking for anyone, so that means Alan and Evan, etc., etc., and Carlton, assuming he manages to make a call. So far, he hasn't made any of the geographic work group calls that we've been on recently, so I'll be excited to see if he joins us on this one. Yes, that was me being, not naughty, but pointed. Is that we ask people to speak to the points that they've raised on the wiki so that it could go into the call record.

We also have got confirmation that at least Tricia will be joining us. So, there are a couple of things. I think, Alan, you for example had said you'd like feedback from Trisha on a couple of things.

Alan Greenberg: I don't really--.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: -You should be able to-.

Alan Greenberg: I don't really recall that, but maybe.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yeah. You mentioned the current Chair of the – which is actually Wolfgang, not Trisha. But she may be able to pass it on under the NomCom--.

Alan Greenberg: --Sorry. I remember making reference to the qualifications that are listed in the NomCom document.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: That's it, yes.

Alan Greenberg: Okay. In fact, I made a further comment after that, pointing out that most of those come directly verbatim out of the bylaws, which are not subject to debate at this point.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yes.

Alan Greenberg: Whether we like them or not.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Alright. So, on that call it won't be sort of presentations as such, but hopefully there will be full of frank and serious debates. Is there any likelihood, Fatimata, that someone from Africa other than you will be on that call? Because if they are, great. If they're not, at the AFRALO call tomorrow, can we at least get people to put up questions or make inquiries on the wiki page or through you at the meeting? There's no reason why you can't be proxying, or whoever attends can't be proxying.

Alan Greenberg: Cheryl, before Fatimata answers, does the agenda item now point to the right wiki page? For a long time it said it will be posted soon.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Oh.

Alan Greenberg: I had one hell of a time finding that page.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: The external link off our wiki, of our meeting today.

Alan Greenberg: No. I don't know what link is there. Yes, that one, but on the agenda page, on the calendar, on both the ALAC and the ALAC wiki, it simply said we'll post it and there was an email message saying it would be posted by last – by the end of last week. And as of the weekend, it hadn't. I'm just asking has it gone up now.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: That's one back to staff. Matthias? Heidi? Someone?

Heidi Ullrich: Alan, can you clarify which wiki?

Alan Greenberg: If you go into any of the ALAC home pages, the ALAC website or the ALAC wiki, there is a physical picture of a month, a calendar.

Heidi Ullrich: Yes.

Alan Greenberg: And if you click on that particular meeting we're talking about on Thursday, is there a URL pointing to something or not?

Heidi Ullrich: Okay. I understand. I will look into that. It should be, yes, absolutely.

Alan Greenberg: Well, hold on. I will be there in a second.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yeah, that's essential.

Alan Greenberg: No, there is not.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Just while we're doing that, because that needs to be fixed (inaudible)--.

Alan Greenberg: --The answer is, no, it is still not there.

Heidi Ullrich: Okay. I will let the appropriate person know right now.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay. Yes, we need to fix that. Thanks for that, Alan. Nice catch.

Alan Greenberg: I spent a good 45 minutes twice finding it and the first time I didn't note it.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay. That is annoying. There's also on that page, when you find it, however you find it, there's a yet-to-be-created page, which is Questions about Legal or Other Issues. Some of the questions that are currently listed under Ideas for Consideration. And some of the answers, for example whether it's in the bylaws, need to be in that page as well. I'm not saying remove them from Ideas for Consideration, but I'm saying we should duplicate them into Questions about Legal or Other Issues. And also, we should link the right bits of the bylaws into that Questions about Legal or Other Issues--.

Alan Greenberg: --My answers have a lot of those links in them.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yeah. So, what I'm suggesting is--.

Alan Greenberg: -Yeah. No, no-.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: --(Inaudible) that across into that page.

Alan Greenberg: Yeah. Sorry, a note to Heidi. There was a link to the correct page in an email. But because of line folding it was a bad link. The word "process" got chopped off. So, make sure whatever gets transposed into the calendar is the full link.

Heidi Ullrich: Okay. Thank you.

Alan Greenberg: Sorry for interrupting.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: No, no. Not a problem. And the other thing is, at the moment we've got the draft candidate requirements, which is I think the next thing we're doing on our agenda. That page needs to be created and populated. And we're only a few days out from that meeting and that needs to be done. Really, I'd call that sort of an ASAP. So, what I'm gonna ask is that each of the – obviously, Heidi and I'll fiddle around with these pages. Alan, it would be really handy if you could make sure that the stuff that relates to legal issues gets – when it duplicate it across is checked so that things are working--.

Alan Greenberg: --I will be glad to check. The order is there's two sections in the bylaws of criteria. There may be stuff in the NomCom rules which are not in the bylaws. I'm not sure. We do want the statement of amount of time involved, which is in the NomCom document. And after that, what things does At-Large want to add which are specific to us?

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Sure.

Alan Greenberg: But that doesn't give you the details, but that's – I think is the sum total of what we're looking for.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yep. Okay. So, there's still a bit of tidying needing to be done on that meeting page.

But coming back in terms of lessons learned from the At-Large Board Liaison election process, I know what I learned. I think having a combination of a well established but tightly time controlled presentation process for community calls when we have a slate of candidates, and having the opportunity for community input via wiki or via proxy with an email in advance of having community calls and briefing calls were very good things, but we need to do them better and further out in the process in any further At-Large Director appointment process. What did anyone else learn there?

The rest of you, with the exception of Fatimata, were major players in this. So, maybe I should ask Fatimata first. Do you feel that if we link the time for input to come in from the ALSes, the At-Large membership, and of course the regional organizations, that having a more interactive and pre-prepared set of questions and discussions is a good idea, Fatimata?

Fatimata Seye Sylla: I mean, I think that's exactly what I suggested last time. So, yeah, it's a good idea. And even if you can't have the ALSes vote, at least you know they're (inaudible). And that's what we (inaudible) to vote.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: (Inaudible.)

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Then coming back then to those that had a greater experience from how it worked, I suppose--.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: --Excuse me. Cheryl?

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Go ahead, Fatimata.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: In our meetings tomorrow we are gonna talk about this.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Good.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: And (inaudible) have an AFRALO view. Because this is just my own thinking. So, we need to talk about it together (inaudible).

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: How people feel about it.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Go ahead, Alan.

Alan Greenberg: Yeah. One quick comment. The issue of how do we present the candidates and get out information I think is of lesser importance right now than the process we will go through to identify the candidates and then select them. And in fact, the details may change depending on whether we have 5,000 voters or 15 voters or something in-between. So, I would prefer to focus on the issues that have to be approved by the board rather than the information distribution vehicles, which may be something we can do at a much later date.

Vanda Scartezini: Yeah. I agree with you, Alan.

Alan Greenberg: Do we have any information, or is someone from the SIC likely to talk about what they think are going to be the minimum requirements for the selection process? Or are they not going to--?

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: --I have no feedback on what might be happening in our meeting in Seoul from the SIC. I would think that they would. And whilst I invited members of the SIC to join the call on the 8th, I've had no RSVP indicating that they would be.

Alan Greenberg: Okay.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Heidi, can we ask Nick to see if – you know, make a real outreach and ask if anyone from the SIC is going to attend? It may be that they've just taken my invitation and said, yes, I'll do it and stuck it in their diaries. It would be nice, I think, to know whether we are expecting someone. And I would also like to suggest that perhaps Marco is a non-negotiable person who should be on that – at that meeting.

Heidi Ullrich: Okay. Yes, I will do that. And I'll write to Marco after this call.

Alan Greenberg: A personal call to Roberto may have value in that he has the freedom of knowing he will not be on the SIC that makes a decision.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: Yes.

Alan Greenberg: And that may make him more or less willing to talk. I don't know.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Well, I specifically--.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: -He can be open-.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: --I specifically made my invitation to join us to Roberto – actually, to Roberto with Trish as a – because you were involved in the review you might be interested in turning up.

Alan Greenberg: Okay.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: I only heard back from Trisha, but I made it clear to both of them that it wasn't just them. It is any and all of their work groups or subcommittees are welcome.

Alan Greenberg: As long as Carl doesn't use it as an opportunity to preach.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: If Carl's there – if he's going to be there, he will use it as an opportunity to preach, guaranteed.

Alan Greenberg: Well, the Chair has some control over the timing.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Absolutely.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: The line is breaking again.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay. So, might it be possible then, Heidi, to just ask Nick or whoever to write. I mean, I've made my invitation. Just to remind them that if we know they're coming it would be really nice and it would be extremely useful to have someone. Or maybe ask Marco to ascertain who from the SIC will be joining us.

Alan Greenberg: Fatimata just said something about something working again, but I don't know what it was.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Please say again, Fatimata.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: I can't understand anything. It's breaking again.

Alan Greenberg: It's breaking again. Okay.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay. We might need to dial out again. But let's move on. Anything else under our plans for the (inaudible) meeting on the 8th.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: I can recognize that Cheryl is speaking, but I don't know what she's saying.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Can someone repeat--.

Alan Greenberg: --Fatimata, can you hear me?

Fatimata Seye Sylla: Yes.

Alan Greenberg: She asked is there--.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: --That's Alan, right?

Alan Greenberg: Yeah, that's right. Is there anything else we need to discuss regarding the meeting on the 8th about selecting the board member?

Fatimata Seye Sylla: No, I don't have any items to suggest.

Alan Greenberg: Okay. Thank you.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: And Alan, can you then repeat for me so Fatimata has a chance of hearing it that at the AFRALO meeting it would be good if she could make sure that all the people in AFRALO know they are welcome to join the call. And I was going to ask Heidi to tell me what time of day that call works out to be for the African region.

Alan Greenberg: Okay. Fatimata, what Cheryl said was to make sure during the AFRALO call, to make sure that the people at this meeting and others know that the meeting on Thursday will happen and that they are welcome to join us.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: Yes.

Alan Greenberg: Cheryl--.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: --We'll do that. Heidi will (inaudible), right?

Alan Greenberg: Say that again?

Fatimata Seye Sylla: Please put that on the agenda.

Alan Greenberg: Heidi will make sure with you it's on the agenda.

Heidi Ullrich: Yes. If I could just update you on this issue.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Please. Go ahead, Heidi.

Heidi Ullrich: Fatimata and I spoke yesterday about this issue and we agreed that it will be a key item on tomorrow's AFRALO call where they will--.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: (Inaudible.) Heidi?

Heidi Ullrich: Yes?

Fatimata Seye Sylla: I don't understand what you say. I can't hear you.

Alan Greenberg: Fatimata, she's just saying that you and Heidi talked yesterday and the meeting will be on the agenda.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: Yes. Yes.

Alan Greenberg: Okay. Cheryl, in answer to your question, the meeting is at 3:00 in the afternoon my time, so it's 9:00 in the evening in Europe.

Heidi Ullrich: It's 2200 in Nairobi.

Alan Greenberg: Yeah. And so, roughly that time. Late in the evening in Africa, depending on what part of Africa.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay. Alright.

Alan Greenberg: Between 8 and 10 in the evening.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay. Well, hopefully that means that anyone who is not restricted to making calls or connecting only from their workplace that we might be able to get people to join us.

Okay. If there's nothing else on that, can we move to the vote on review of the implementation outline plan and the agreed wording on the vote?

Sebastien Bachollet: Sorry, I was off. But the 4.a., you already go through?

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: We have, but pleased to go back to it. What did you wish to say on that?

Sebastien Bachollet: I would like to – I think there are a lot of things what – goes wrong. And that's not a big deal, but we need to fix them. For example, I don't understand why some of the documents are given by one candidate are not to be sent at the same time than the other because this allows the other to read it first and then to make their own if they wish. And that's not equality. And there are other little points like that I see during the time of the election process and I would like very much that we fix that for the next one. And saying that, I have no problem at all, and really at all with the results, with the way it's handled. But I think we need to fix those little issues before going to the next election process.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay.

Alan Greenberg: There's a lot of things related to the actual election process and the stages immediately before it which are going to have to be thought about in detail. But they're not part of what we need approval on the board for – from the board.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: But we--.

Sebastien Bachollet: --No. But for example, my other trouble is that the discussion was deep into the RALO with set of the candidates and not with the full list of the candidates. And I think we need to think how it could be handled in a better way to (inaudible) the decision with one part of the possible candidates. Because the RALO discuss the one they will put into the list and they didn't have time to discuss with the whole list to decide how they will vote and that struck me somewhere.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: That may have happened in some RALOs, but not in all, of course, Sebastien.

Sebastien Bachollet: No, no. Yeah, yeah. Yeah, yeah, of course. Yes.

Alan Greenberg: And the – we will have more time, so--.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yeah. And I think with that word "time," Alan, what I was going to say is, what we need to make clear on our call on the 8th is that, depending on what outcome we have for the general design and what we need board approval to change or to do, we will then have to have a very good look and discussion and agree on specific timing and time tabling and the process. Because ideally, if you have – for example, if it goes down the track of having a pre-selection process, that has to have a clear stop. There has to be a break for people to prepare. And then you have to have a fresh start, then, on a full candidate listing process as a result of the pre-selection process.

Sebastien Bachollet: Okay. I agree. And I would like just that all the little things to be taken into on timing.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay.

Alan Greenberg: The part of the timing that I think is important to mention and the preamble to the call is we may – I'm not saying we will, but we may come up with a process which will take nine months. If you look at the process within ICANN to select board members, it takes close to a year.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr Yes.

Alan Greenberg: And people have to understand this is not going to be something done overnight. You know, when you look in regard to Evan's suggestion that the term only be one year, that says we may start planning a new one before the first one has even attended a board meeting.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yes. I'm not terribly sure that that's a practical thing that--.

Alan Greenberg: --No, no. I understand. But people have not thought about those issues is what I'm saying.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yes. Okay. So, can we make sure then that this issue of process and timing and timing milestones, the practicalities, the actual issues, once – regardless of what direction it goes in, once a direction is decided and approved, that the project planning on that also needs to be brought to the community's attention in the call.

Alan Greenberg: Yep.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: I've skipped an item and I blame everyone but me for letting me do that. If we can go back to item three, which is a fairly important one.

Alan Greenberg: I had noticed.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: It's called Agree Process to Formalize the Division Description document. And Alan, the floor is yours.

Alan Greenberg: Okay. We already agreed that following a reasonable period for comments after the last ALAC meeting, I would summarize and then send it out and request the initiation of a vote. Unfortunately, it took two weeks instead of one week for me to do that. Therefore, we have now overlapped with this meeting. Unless I hear something different or unless someone points out some specific errors in that document, I would like to send it out as soon as possible and request a one week vote to be started, as we decided in the ALAC meeting.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Alan, can I ask, have you checked that the link to the document, which is the only document I'm looking at at the moment from today's ExCom agenda is the document you are referring to?

Alan Greenberg: It is the one I was referring to.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay.

Alan Greenberg: Heidi was very kind to point to it.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Thank you. Okay.

Alan Greenberg: Now, once it goes out we will then link it as a draft pending approval in the ALAC policy section. I believe it is not currently there, but it will be there. But I just want someone – I did this late last night, if anyone looks at the timing of the document. I have not had a chance to proofread it yet today. I will after this call. I would appreciate it if at least one other person proofreads it and gets back to me so we can get it out. If there's typos in it, we can still fix it, but I believe it is accurate at this point.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay. Well, I believe it should be up to each and every one of us to do that. So, that's an action item on all of us for, in the next 24 hours or so, can we do a reading and get to the ExCom list if there is any minor changes or edit changes. That's not a problem. Get back to Alan. And then we need now to look at when we put it out for a vote. What dates are going to work? It would be good to have this done in as short a space as possible. So, I'd be happy for only a five-day vote. Alan, what are you suggesting in terms of dates?

Alan Greenberg: Well, if I send it out tomorrow and the vote ends – I mean, I was hoping to send it out today. But if I send it out tomorrow and the vote starts tomorrow at the end of the day, it depends. Do people need 24 hours or can we do it in less is the real question?

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Ask everyone else. If Fatimata can hear you, then you might get feedback from--.

Alan Greenberg: Fatimata, do you think you'll be able to look at t his document in the next – it's already night time there, first thing tomorrow morning? And the same goes for--.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: First thing tomorrow morning, I will not be able to do that.

Alan Greenberg: No. Okay. Will you be able to by 24 hours from now?

Fatimata Seye Sylla: Yeah, I will try.

Alan Greenberg: Okay. I will wait 24 hours.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: I absolutely have – we have the AFRALO meeting. So, if we finish early, I will try to read it.

Alan Greenberg: Okay. I will wait – it's only about two and a half pages. It's not very large.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: I just have electricity now.

Alan Greenberg: Okay.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: I'm sorry.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: It's difficult if she can't unload the document--.

Alan Greenberg: --Then print it out quickly. You don't need electricity for paper. Okay. I will wait 24 hours. I will then – unless I hear anything, I will send it out or with any minor modifications. We should not make substantive changes at this point.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: No.

Alan Greenberg: But typographical things. I have no doubt there are errors in there and there are definitely going to be omissions. It will be the living document. Let's get something on the table.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: Yeah.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Can I then make sure that, as long as everyone else can fit to that timetable, yes, no? Say no if you need to. Okay. So, we'll be starting a vote in plus 24. Matthias, if you want to get set up to do that, you can pre-prepare that, can't you, and then we can just have the final pdf document attached to the (inaudible) vote, too. Yes?

Matthias Langenegger: Yes. That shouldn't be a problem. If you – if we say, for example, we start to vote on Thursday or on Friday, I can just prepare the (inaudible) I think to whatever document I get from Alan.

Alan Greenberg: Cheryl, if I put this out tomorrow night, you will be able to look at it first thing your morning. Or not first thing, it'll be almost midday by the time I put it out, and you can then decide – you can then send a message or you can decide or delegate to me to tell Europe, Matthias, first thing in his morning. So, it's going to be – it's now Tuesday night. It'll be out Wednesday night. You will look at it Thursday morning and Matthias can start – can initiate the vote early Thursday morning his time.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay. But he now can get all set up, ready to just push it out.

Alan Greenberg: Yeah. Yeah.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yes? Fantastic.

Alan Greenberg: But the document change, but yes.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay. And we then need just to make sure that--.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: (Inaudible.)

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: --If we write any edit on the document, it's also linked to the page for our community call on the matter, that's all.

Alan Greenberg: Okay.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Was that Fatimata again?

Fatimata Seye Sylla: Yeah. I'm just telling Alan that I will read it tonight as I have electricity.

Alan Greenberg: Oh, okay. Marvelous. Then either 24 hours from now or after all four of you get back to me, I will send it out.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: Okay.

Alan Greenberg: Thank you all.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: You're welcome.

Alan Greenberg: Back to the agenda.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Right-o. So, that brings us to the Review of Implementation Outline Plan and the proposed wording. I have no problem with the proposed wording. Does anyone have a problem with the proposed wording?

Fatimata Seye Sylla: No.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: In which case, why don't we set that to vote at the same time as we're running our position description. That way, people log-on and do two things. Or do you want them separated?

Alan Greenberg: Well, they need to be two separate votes. Otherwise, people who have not read one document can't vote on the other, but they could be--.

Vanda Scartezini: Yeah.

Alan Greenberg: --And so they could be synchronized with each other, certainly.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Synchronized so people are logging on to (inaudible) in response to the one, please log on and do something.

Alan Greenberg: Yes.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: I think that's probably the best way so people don't get confused about what vote is happening when.

Alan Greenberg: Okay.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay. So, yes, we all agree with the proposed wording of the vote and we will run that perfect synchronicity with the other matter.

Vanda Scartezini: That's good.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: The next item on the agenda is the affirmation of commitments, At-Large community follow-up. There's a couple of things I wanted to bring up specifically underneath that. But the first one, which I haven't actually managed to get in and edit the wiki, I would have put in was the specific permission from the top to send as a piece of information or put onto a wiki page a piece of information the bench statement with the EU support of the statements that was sent in response to the AOC from the French Government and the EU people. And that then brings me to the question of how we're going to do that and are we going to put up, as Sebastien suggested, a page where ALSes, individuals or anyone else, and perhaps it could be within the world of the Face Book space for At-Large, can make some sort of input or comments on their view in the AOC (ph). Other people's views?

Alan Greenberg: I would prefer it not be done on the Face Book.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Well, I detest Face Book. I just--.

Alan Greenberg: I'm – my only presence on Face Book is with a pseudonym, which you do not know.

Vanda Scartezini: Well, I am on the Face Book.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Vanda, I am, too. But you know, it's not my preference is the point--.

Vanda Scartezini: -Yeah. It is not my preference, too. But anyway-.

Alan Greenberg: -I have a very specific-.

Vanda Scartezini: --It's an easy way to talk with the kids and the grandchild and so on.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Exactly. Yeah. Okay. I think we're looking at slightly more formal than the Face Book space.

Vanda Scartezini: Yes.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Sebastien, is that your desire?

Sebastien Bachollet: Yes. And maybe I read what Nick say, that there are quite (inaudible). Maybe we can ask our friend from wiki, ICANN wiki to set up a page for that and help us with that. Following (inaudible) could be one way to stop ALAC's missing. And if so, I am willing to discuss with Olivier to ask him to help us with that if you wish.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Alan, Vanda, Fatimata, responses to that?

Vanda Scartezini: That's okay. Yeah.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: I'm not a Face Book person, so--.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: No, no. We're all not Face Book people. I think we've established that. The suggestion was – Alan, you might need to repeat the suggestion to Fatimata from Sebastien, which was to utilize the skills and tools from the ICANN wiki people.

Alan Greenberg: The purpose, if I understand, is to solicit comments from the At-Large community on the affirmation. Is that correct?

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yes.

Alan Greenberg: Or did I miss something?

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: No, no. No.

Alan Greenberg: Okay. So, the suggestion is that following the affirmation of commitments, which is the replacement for the JPA, we would like to get comments from the community on whether they think this is a good thing or a bad thing, or whatever they think. And that the current suggestion is that we set up a wiki page where people can issue comments.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: Yeah. I agree with that.

Alan Greenberg: She agrees with that.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: (Inaudible.) Yeah.

Vanda Scartezini: Yeah. Yeah.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: So, the advantage of integrating an ICANN wiki into what will be an ALAC wiki page as a link out, would be that people can upload photos and be more interactive with their content in that world. If that's the case and we agree with that way forward, and I think it's a good idea because it would also then link with people's summit wiki presences and everything else, we would be asking Sebastien to make that outreach and see what can be arranged.

Alan Greenberg: Okay. So, this is on the ICANNWIKI, not the ICANN wiki.

Vanda Scartezini: Yeah.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: It's – they need to put in our wiki, our formal wiki, a page that will have French statements and we set up this place, a quick link here goes out to the ICANN wiki, all one word.

Alan Greenberg: Exactly. Not – we are not talking about a wiki run by ICANN, but the wiki called ICANNWIKI, all one word.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Correct. To allow for--.

Alan Greenberg: --Which is run by non-ICANN – which is run by non-ICANN people.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Correct.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: That's right.

Alan Greenberg: Okay. Just making sure we all are talking the same language. Spaces are hard to hear on a teleconference.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: Okay.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: So, that means that we give the community an opportunity to be more interactive.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: To be more--?

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Interactive. Because you can upload photos and things, which you can't do to our wiki very easily.

Alan Greenberg: I'm not convinced we want to encourage that, but whatever you like. You're a more emedia person than I am.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Go ahead, Sebastien.

Sebastien Bachollet: I don't know what you want not to encourage. I would like to address on the At-Large wiki. But as it seems that it's difficult for staff to handle that in this period, I was trying to find something else. And Face Book, that's a good one. And then I suggest the ICANNWIKI because it's really belonging to our community, even if it's not ICANN staff--.

Alan Greenberg: --Forgive me, but why is this an ICANN staff intensive issue? I can set up a page, create a tiny URL that has a meaningful name to it and publicize it. Why – what am I missing that says this is a staff-intensive issue?

Sebastien Bachollet: I can't answer for staff. I just trying to find something because I read something written by staff about that.

Alan Greenberg: Okay. I saw that message, but I didn't read it, so I--.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: -Alan, are you saying, and I think I heard Sebastien indicate – Sebastien, you did indicate you would prefer it to be in our formal wiki space? Alan, are you-?

Alan Greenberg: --The ALAC wiki.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Correct.

Alan Greenberg: The At-Large wiki.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: You prefer that, too, yes?

Alan Greenberg: I don't see why not.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: (Inaudible.)

Alan Greenberg: Unless you need to upload pictures.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Vanda?

Vanda Scartezini: Yeah.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay.

Sebastien Bachollet: Yeah. Alan, the way it was starting, all that – sorry, just why we are discussing about pictures is because I was very, very upset that an organization coming to be an international organization organized a feast for a few people in Washington DC. It was not for me a good image. And I would like, as ALAC member, to show better image of our community as an international organization. And one of the ideas was to have a photo of Cheryl drinking some good bubble things at the time of the Washington DC feast was organized and the same for Vanda, the same for you the same for me. And for other people, it could be a sentence. For other people it could be whatever. But photo was one of the trick to be more effective.

Alan Greenberg: Then I think it needs to be on the ICANNWIKI because I don't think the wiki that we're using for At-Large can support that. I may be wrong. I mean, you can upload a picture and have to click on it, but you can't do it inline, I don't think.

Sebastien Bachollet: I don't know.

Vanda Scartezini: (Inaudible.)

Fatimata Seye Sylla: I have a question for Sebastien.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Go ahead, Fatimata.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: What kind of pictures would you like to upload, just to show that this is international?

Alan Greenberg: He was saying that Cheryl, who has a picture of her making a toast with a drink to the new ICANN should be able to upload a picture of her doing that.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Vanda, anyone?

Vanda Scartezini: Yeah. I put mine to the LACRALO, but we could not put them in the wiki page. And so, I put my Skype--. Anyway, a lot of people have comment the picture. So, I believe it's very important to make our international and broad view of the ICANN community.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay. So, it sounds to me like Sebastien does need to pursue all of the--.

Alan Greenberg: --Sounds so.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: When I read the exchange of emails, for me, it was just about showing that all the people should be celebrating, too. Is that the idea or is it wrong?

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yes, correct. No, correct.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: So, how many pictures do we need to put on there? I mean, if you have to create something different from the ICANNWIKI, unless you (inaudible) – I mean to that website or whatever link, to that wiki, we'd be (inaudible) international? I mean, I think it's great to do that, to show that we're really participating should be within the ICANNWIKI. Or even our At-Large wiki. If you can't do it there, we need to find a way to do it instead of doing something separate. Can staff help us achieve what we want to do?

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay. So, I'm hearing something needs to be done and we would prefer it to be within the formal wiki space. I'm also hearing that it is not going to – it can't require any form of our staff input at the moment. And that if any images are to be used, I assume we can upload just a static photo into the ALAC wiki, can we not? Matthias? Heidi? Tell me. I'm gonna try to put a photo into it.

Alan Greenberg: I know you can upload it and then click on the link and see the picture. I've never seen an inline picture on the wiki. Maybe it can be done. I don't know how. I'm not--.

Matthias Langenegger: --I think actually it can be done, yeah. I think it is possible. I'm not quite sure how at this place, but I've seen wikis with pictures.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: So, as a matter of timing, I mean, by the time we can find the answers to those questions, we'll probably be the other side of Seoul. Do we want to put a page in the formal wiki with a link out to the ICANNWIKI, which is what we used for the summit or not? At the moment, I think I'm hearing about a 50/50 split amongst the ExCom.

Alan Greenberg: I don't care.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay. It seems Fatimata would prefer it to be formal within the ALAC wiki.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: Yes.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: The point, I believe, was if it's not within the formal ALAC wiki, how does it show it to be international.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: I mean, is this a formal thing? (Inaudible) something at the ICANN, so I think we need to have people see it and see that we want to be involved and that's our way of being involved.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yes, I agree. I think the sentiment and the intent is clear and we're all in agreement. The mechanism is not clear, so--.

Sebastien Bachollet: I am trying to do that on the At-Large wiki and it's written like that. It's attached image.

Alan Greenberg: Yeah. There is an icon for adding an image.

Sebastien Bachollet: Display an image on this page. The image must be already uploaded as an attachment to this page or to another page. Use this form to (inaudible) the properties of the displayed image. And you are to put the image file name, which size and save it. I guess it's visible. Let's have a try. Leave us 24 hours. If we find a way to do it within the At-Large wiki, we do it inside that. If not, I will ask ICANNWIKI (inaudible).

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay. So basically, we the ExCom are going to do that as jointly and severally, right?

Alan Greenberg: Yeah.

Sebastien Bachollet: Yes.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: Yes.

Vanda Scartezini: So, we send the pictures to whom?

Alan Greenberg: You may be able to do it yourself. Give us 24 hours.

Vanda Scartezini: Okay.

Heidi Ullrich: I'm awaiting a response from our tech staff. I very much expect it to be within 24 minutes versus 24 hours.

Alan Greenberg: And some of us are trying it as we speak.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Thank you, Heidi. Now, however, we will link as documents the statements from the French Government, because they kind of specifically requested us to do so, to this wiki page. So, when someone sets one up, can you let me know so I can start putting up these things? And what I'd like to do is, if any of us find any other statements – and Heidi, maybe if staff see if they can let us know – anything else coming in from governments or whether or not we can put a link to the ICANN listing of comments coming into the information. They're doing it off their main page. That's beyond my wiki technical expertise. And we probably need permission to do so, anyway. So, that might be something else to go back to tech from.

Heidi Ullrich: So, Cheryl, I didn't quite get that.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: On the – you need to – can you go to the ICANN website?

Heidi Ullrich: Yes.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: The ordinary ICANN website. It has on the right-hand side, "Reactions to ICANN's Affirmation of Commitments." Now, that data is coming from somewhere. I'd like to be able to link to either that data or that – if need be, I guess – to me their page isn't working properly. Either that or they've only got one thing coming in from Vint Cerf, which is kind of sad. There's a whole pile of reactions to ICANN's Affirmation of Commitments. What we put up on our page, we need to embed the video, which is simple. That we can do. I'd also – because we have permission to do that.

I'd also like to know how we can embed – ah, there is more coming through now. Obviously, the pipe to the information has cleared from Australia. I'd also like to be able to link to, on the ICANN webpage, home page, Reaction to ICANN's Affirmation of Commitments. Our people looking at all of this from the ALAC web and wiki can also see what's going on off the ICANN home page. The other thing is we can encourage our own people to put in Affirmation of Commitment reactions if we know where to send them. I don't know where to send one.

Okay. Election Call for ALAC Officers and Liaisons.

Alan Greenberg: If anyone would like to--.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Elected--.

Alan Greenberg: --If anyone would like to go to the ALAC meeting of January 13th this year.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: January 13th this year?

Vanda Scartezini: What?

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: You'd like me to go to it? As a link.

Vanda Scartezini: It's missing.

Alan Greenberg: If you can find the Social Text page for the meeting of January 13th.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yeah.

Alan Greenberg: You can do that in your spare time as we're going on.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay.

Heidi Ullrich: I will add it.

Alan Greenberg: You'll add it to what?

Heidi Ullrich: Sorry. I was twittering.

Alan Greenberg: Oh.

Heidi Ullrich: I will add it to the ExCom Skype Chat.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: I mean, she's just gonna universally add it here. (Laughs.)

Alan Greenberg: No, I didn't start up Skype this time around.

Heidi Ullrich: Oh, yeah. I see Alan is talking – a very good photo.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay. So, things can happen. Right. Okay.

Alan Greenberg: Well, I don't know how to put it only at the bottom, but you can upload for the pictures (inaudible).

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay. So, we should be able to do it is the short thing. And I've made the request on the linking to the--. The embedded video we can do. We know that because we've got permission to do that. I want to seek permission to the other affirmation reactions. And I'd also like to know how our community can put in to affirmation.

Okay. And you've sent – all very nice, right. Thanks for sharing that. And I must look now at exactly who put that up because I think it's probably (inaudible) statement, but never mind.

Alan Greenberg: What are you talking about?

Matthias Langenegger: That stinks, Alan. (Laughing.)

Alan Greenberg: That picture's not an "up yours" statement!

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Are you sure?

Alan Greenberg: I'm quite sure.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay. Fine.

Alan Greenberg: Just pointing out we were perverted. I will get rid of it. Don't worry.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Alright. The page that links to the various elections. We don't have a column for the officers indicating what region they represent. We must. And I can't do that. Staff has to do it. So, under election for officers in the received nominations tables, it must include what region we are representing. And the only other thing is, for some bizarre and peculiar reason, we now have a whole bunch of columns next to Wendy Seltzer's name on the page, which has to be something happening when the last edit was done.

Heidi Ullrich: Yeah. Actually, it was there before and I just saw it prior, so I will go in and fix that.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: And the other thing is, do you think it would be nice to actually have some form of announcement on the result of it on that page? I know I'm asking a lot.

(Everyone laughing.)

Heidi Ullrich: Cheryl, which – the announcement of the outcome?

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yeah.

Heidi Ullrich: On the left-hand side we have columns that say the election outcomes.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yeah, okay. It said Elected down the side. I really, really, really think that, seeing as we have notes that say who's withdrawn and why, that right up at the top underneath ALAC Board Liaison Position we have a new piece, a sentence in pretty colors and nice bold language saying, "As at the result of (date inserted) Vanda has been elected. See table below." If you need to. And probably a link to the (inaudible). But it just – it doesn't stick out and it really ought to. Because you've got to read all the way to the very bottom to realize that the election is not still going on.

Sebastien Bachollet: And if I can add one point, it will be good if the thing we are working on now would be put at the top of the page. Because nobody will go so far into the page to see--.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: -Yes-.

Sebastien Bachollet: --The ALAC officer and the Other Liaison Position. And maybe we can not label them as "Other Liaison Position," but just type "Liaison Position." We know that the board is already done. And well done.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: You're right, Sebastien. Yeah. You get (inaudible). By the time you get past the NomCom delegates and then the ALAC representatives and then the--.

Sebastien Bachollet: Yeah.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Whatever. Now, the only other way is if we can put some enter points in, right, and make sure that when you click onto--.

Sebastien Bachollet: -Yeah. Okay-.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: -This page for --in relation to our current elections, that it takes you to that part of the page. But I don't care which way it does, but at the moment it takes you to the top and-.

Sebastien Bachollet: You're right, Cheryl. I give the solution. I must ask for the question and the staff and technician. We find the right solution. Yes, you're right.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: So, I don't care how it happens, but let's make sure we, A, get the--.

Sebastien Bachollet: --That we can go directly there. Yeah.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yeah. Okay. So, regions needs to be added. The bizarre columns next to Wendy need to be deleted. And just make it really clear so the more stupid amongst us, or those with really bad vision, that in fact what has been completed is completed. Maybe putting next to "NomCom Committee Delegates - Completed - Result Is - See Below Table," a link to the table. Next to the "ALAC Representatives," hyphen, "Completed." Link to the "See the Table Below." "ALAC Board Position - Completed." In that case it can just say who it is and "See the Table Below."

Okay. Anything else on that matter? If not, we can do Any Other Business and I have a piece of Any Other Business which we need to make a decision on. Are you all excited?

Alan Greenberg: Oh, yes.

Sebastien Bachollet: I have another piece of Any Other Business, but go ahead.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: My Any Other Business is that, with our now concerned lunch meeting with the GAC in Seoul, Janis has asked me, and I'm asking our board, to fill in the time available over a lunch break that to try and look at more than one topic would be too much, that we have a single table topic or discussion point. And at the moment, we don't even know what the room set up is going to be like as to whether or not it's going to be more formal around the microphone system, with lunch on our laps or whether it's gonna be table topics. But what he would be asking us to do is to get back to him with what is our preferred topic so the GAC can agree or otherwise. The two that we had spoken about was the new gTLDs or the JPA, post-JPA, which we can now call the AOC. So, which of those two topics, or do you want to suggest another one, would you like to have as a single agenda item with our GAC meeting?

Alan Greenberg: When you say new gTLDs, it's all – not just IDN?

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Correct.

Vanda Scartezini: Well--.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Vanda, go ahead.

Sebastien Bachollet: Personally, I prefer the JPA.

Vanda Scartezini: JPA, yeah.

Sebastien Bachollet: (Inaudible.)

Vanda Scartezini: The change of the whole – of GAC (inaudible) of the JPA, it's a very important point to us to debate. And get some feedback from them what they are feeling and how we can have our group in the region more connected with them. Something like that.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay. Fatimata? Alan, you might need to repeat to Fatimata.

Alan Greenberg: The two topics that we're talking about for our meeting that we are now confirmed with the GAC on – Sunday noon?

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Correct.

Alan Greenberg: Sunday noon, is either gTLDs or the confirmation of – I forget the name--.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: (Inaudible) the AOC.

Alan Greenberg: AOC, accommodation agreement. And Sebastien and Vanda said the accommodation agreement; specifically, how does the GAC – how does this impact the GAC and what are their views. My position is I think that's a far more interesting topic than another discussion on gTLDs. And specifically, I would be interested in hearing that, with this new agreement, the GAC has significantly new and enhanced powers and responsibilities and how do they plan – how do they image, because there are no plans yet – that they exercise these in a transparent and open way.

Vanda Scartezini: And how could we help them with all the community in our side working, how could we help them.

Alan Greenberg: We could also ask that. But I – okay.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yeah. I think that's why it's a good idea. What does Fatimata think?

Fatimata Seye Sylla: Yeah. I think it's a good idea. And I think it's good, as Vanda said, to make an emphasis in the community. (Inaudible) to let them know that we can make a difference. I mean, we're talking to the GAC people.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay. Alright. Well, I will now get back – so an action item on me is to get back to Janis and tell him that the AOC is the topic and then we'll work with staff to work out all the logistics. What then we also need to do is let our community know that that is going to be the topic and that they need to come prepared with their community views, as well as their personal views--.

Vanda Scartezini: -Yes-.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: --On some of this discussion.

Alan Greenberg: That's agreed.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Alright.

Vanda Scartezini: Okay.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: What's your piece of Any Other Business, Sebastien, before I call for any others?

Sebastien Bachollet: Just one – the first, I put it on the comment on the page for today's meeting. It's the bylaw. I sent you proposal to have change bylaw for the liaison for ALAC. I would like you to go in to read it and to give me your feedback. But more globally, I think we need – I would like very much to have another view of whether all the ballot change on the table today and not piece by piece. Because there are so many interlink changes and I have no good view on that. And I think we need as ALAC to have a better view on the changes of the bylaws.

Alan Greenberg: Can you clarify what you mean by a change in the bylaws for the liaison position?

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yeah.

Sebastien Bachollet: I sent you a proposal--.

Vanda Scartezini: -Yeah-.

Sebastien Bachollet: --Saying that – to be short, GAC – on the bylaw it's written by GAC with other liaison with all the ACMS and we don't. And I would like to change the bylaw to allow us to have a liaison to which each – any ASO and AC, if we want to, like for GAC.

Alan Greenberg: I would suggest that we talk to the various groups before we ask for a bylaw change.

Sebastien Bachollet: Yeah. But one way to start the discussion in our group is to write something. And I write something.

Alan Greenberg: Okay.

Vanda Scartezini: Okay. It's good that you have some piece of paper with an idea to discuss more easily with the others (inaudible).

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Can I – Vanda, thank you for that. And can I say, Sebastien, I would like to propose that – I'd say there's a crossover here with what we can be discussing with the GAC in our lunch meeting. I'd say that with the increased power of GAC that our concern that as another AC and with a considerable and well recognized role of bringing the voice of the Internet user into the ICANN processes, that we should in fact be very keen to pursue with the GAC a formal liaison relationship.

Sebastien Bachollet: I totally agree with that and with you. It's one of the main reasons for my proposal for the bylaw change. I think it's even – I written in August, that. But with AOC it's even more important. And with the decision of the board to allow us to have one board working member, it's important. And we, GAC and ALAC, will be more powerful, if I can say like that. And then we need to have a change at our level and that's really very important as of today. It's one – that's the main reason of my proposal for a change of the bylaws.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay.

Sebastien Bachollet: But of course, it could be – we don't need to have this – we don't need to put this as a bylaw change. We can discuss that with the GAC and with the other. But me, it was easier to write you a proposal as it's a bylaw change. It's why I do that in that way.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Um-hmm. Okay. So, I'm going to move that we bring these things to our informal, but nevertheless starting the discussion with the GAC agenda for our lunch meeting on Sunday. And then that means that we can discuss it during Seoul and further it immediately after Seoul. And I think it's a good time to be doing that.

There is the other matter you raised, however, Sebastien, and that is the piecemeal way that the bylaw changes are being presented to us.

Sebastien Bachollet: Yeah.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: That's a separate matter and I--.

Sebastien Bachollet: --Yeah. Yeah.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: I think that's one that we do need to consider. What forum should we be brining that up in? Do you want us to write to the board and raise this as a matter of concern or what?

Sebastien Bachollet: You know, I am sure, because I have already had this discussion and we exchanged that during the (inaudible) discussion and with the IGS preparation with Bertrand, that it's also one of – I don't know if it's GAC concern or his concern, but I guess it would be the same at the end of the day. And then it will be a topic we will discuss with GAC during our lunch because it's related with the AOC, too.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay. So, we need to make sure that some of the things that we have in the conversation – and I'm now heading towards suggesting that we have a couple of priming points in our agenda with the GAC so that, in the AOC meeting discussions, if not in the formal agenda, at least in the ALAC agenda so we're prepared, that here are a couple of subtopics that might be worthwhile having a conversation about. Okay. So, we'll leave that into that space.

Is there any other Any Other Business?

Alan Greenberg: I would like--.

Sebastien Bachollet: --Yeah. Sorry, I was – my second was not this one, but I just want to tell you that I send today to the – I guess to our group and then to the staff a revised version of the document about gTLD explanation, that we want to do as At-Large in French, English and Spanish. I made quite a lot of edits in French and now I think it could go for printing or whatever would be done for that.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay. I haven't seen that yet, but then I haven't managed to get into my emails as yet.

Sebastien Bachollet: And I put you (inaudible) to suggest something on presentation for gTLDs. And if you have a chance to have a look and give me your feedback, I will be--.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: --That depends on the vagaries of my computer and its connection to the Internet.

Alan, you were going to say something?

Alan Greenberg: I was gonna ask for a report on AC/SO. Is there a topic and a date yet?

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: I have two other pieces of Any Other Business. That's one of them.

Alan Greenberg: Okay. I have another one, but I forgot what it is. So, if you're lucky, you'll terminate the meeting before I remember.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay. The two pieces of Any Other Business in the order I've written them down in my piece of paper. And again, if I'd have been able to get on to the wiki early enough to make these edits, I would have. I am concerned, and I'd like to get the ExCom's response and guidance on the material in the public introduction to ISOC New York's meeting on the AOC, which is running later this week. We have Beau Brendler representing us. We have – I didn't know that until I read it. That in itself is an interesting thing. We have Danny Younger and we have Milton Mueller as speakers. And we have an introduction and background which uses incorrect terminology. And I think that is something that we should be asking – and I would like to suggest that it's probably staff – to make sure that ISOC New York at least uses the right terms for At-Large structures. I'm not sure what an ALO is but, according to ISOC New York, that's an ALS.

Alan Greenberg: I guess the only comment, with my tongue very much in my cheek, is picky, picky, picky.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yeah, well, pardon me but I always think facts and uniformity are really good things.

Alan Greenberg: You see, that'll get you nowhere.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yes, clearly with that lineup. And I include our own representative. Okay. That's the – if you could all have a look at that link that I've just put in. Obviously, Fatimata, if you're not online yet, in the – oh, I've just put it in the wrong space, sorry .

Alan Greenberg: She's online because she sent me email, so--.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: I'm online.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay. The ISOC New York link is there. When you read it, you'll see, much to my surprise that – the fact – I'm happy for Beau to be there. It would just have been nice if the ALAC knew.

Alan Greenberg: Especially if he's representing us. As a private individual, he doesn't need to tell us anything.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: True. But the fact that he will--.

Alan Greenberg: -Although (inaudible)-.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: --Be assumed to be representing us as a serving member of the ALAC. And it is part of his speaker's profile. I just really think – you know. I'm not gonna slap any wrists, but I am listing my concern to the rest of you on this. And the fact that it is full of inaccuracies, to say the least, I think needs to be responded to. I do not believe that it is going to be a smart move for me to make an ordinary comment correcting their inaccuracies, but what do you all think?

Sebastien Bachollet: I will take another pass and ask staff to discuss with staff with member of the New York ISOC chapter. Ex-board member of ISOC as well.

Vanda Scartezini: (Inaudible.)

Sebastien Bachollet: Because he can do something, I am sure.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yeah. But I mean, many of our ALSes won't even know what an ALO is. Especially those who don't speak and work in English all the time.

Alan Greenberg: Well, an ALO can seek to become an ALS.

Heidi Ullrich: I think what they're saying is a (inaudible) At-Large organization--.

Sebastien Bachollet: --I know it's RALO.

Heidi Ullrich: Yeah.

Sebastien Bachollet: It's not ALS, it's RALO.

Alan Greenberg: Ah.

Heidi Ullrich: Because they do (inaudible) ALS below in the next sentence.

Alan Greenberg: If they had capitalized the word "Regional" and then transposed it into the acronym it would be RALO.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: But you do see my problem with all of that, don't you?

Sebastien Bachollet: Yeah.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: I don't see the problem we're talking about.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay. That's probably because--.

Alan Greenberg: --In the fourth paragraph, right in the second line, middle of the line. Are you looking at the ISOC New York page?

Fatimata Seye Sylla: Yes.

Alan Greenberg: It says, "regional At-Large Organizations," which they then make an ALO.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: ALO.

Alan Greenberg: Which should be RALO.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: And it's not just--.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: (Inaudible.)

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: --(Inaudible) RALO. Membership is not universally open to individuals.

Sebastien Bachollet: No, it's not.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: Okay.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: I mean, it's full of errors and inaccuracies, which is not what we need right now.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: So, who wrote this?

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: I have no idea. I just found it.

Alan Greenberg: Well, since the title of the page is "Civic Representation in ICANN," and the first speaker is Milt Mueller, you can draw some conclusions from this.

(Laughter.)

Vanda Scartezini: But there is some – Beau is there, too, and Dan Younger. So, it's a huge (inaudible)--.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: --It's gonna be very anti-us.

Vanda Scartezini: Yeah.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: And I really think two things should happen. First of all, I'm glad Beau's going to be there but he should maybe – you know?

Fatimata Seye Sylla: Maybe--.

Sebastien Bachollet: -Take his-.

Alan Greenberg: --Bring his submachine gun?

Sebastien Bachollet: Not gun, but his armor, yes.

Alan Greenberg: Oh, no. I think he's – never mind.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: But I mean, Cheryl?

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Um-hmm?

Fatimata Seye Sylla: As Beau is participating, maybe he should be the one making the questions.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: I would think that that will make him seem small, petulant and difficult to get along with, which is probably very much what at least one of the other speakers wants him to appear like. I'm also concerned that we have had no interaction with Beau. We as an ALAC don't know what his presentation is going to be.

Vanda Scartezini: No. Yeah, you're right.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: We don't even know he's making it.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: That's a good point. Okay.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: So, two things. Can we ask – and I do think it should be staff – that the errors and inaccuracies in the introductory piece are at least changed. I'm sure they're only oversight and incidental, but it is confusing for our community and I suspect those who are not so intimately involved in it. And I'd like to get your guidance on whether or not we, the ALAC, are involved in this or should be involved in this and, if so, how? Are we going to logon? Are we going to tell Beau that we're here to help him? What are we doing?

Vanda Scartezini: Well, normally I'm not in favor to put ourselves in a position we were not invited to.

Alan Greenberg: The wording also says, "The At-Large Advisory Council was formed with official liaison (inaudible) as an interim measure in 2003."

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yeah!

Alan Greenberg: We weren't formed as an interim measure. There was an interim version.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Exactly. Yeah.

Alan Greenberg: Okay.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: When I--.

Alan Greenberg: --You got that. Okay, fine. Sorry.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: There's no shortage of them. This is a highly spun document. And the thing is, I don't believe Beau has the information set to counterpoint it.

Heidi Ullrich: And--.

Sebastien Bachollet: --Sorry, I was just looking for the information we received on that. (Inaudible) sent email to the NA discuss list and to the (inaudible) worldwide and he says, "Please feel free to email me off list with any egregious mistakes in my description below."

Alan Greenberg: Is that below the same--.

Sebastien Bachollet: --(Inaudible.)

Alan Greenberg: Is that the same as the one on the list?

Sebastien Bachollet: Yeah. I didn't read it, but I guess. Yeah, at the beginning, at the time, I didn't read all, but yes, it seemed to be the same.

Alan Greenberg: So, someone correct him.

Alan Greenberg: We have the possibility, anybody or any one of us can do that because we received it as an At-Large member.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Well, I'm gonna have to suggest it can't be me, for obvious reasons.

Sebastien Bachollet: Yeah, yeah, yeah.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: So, I'd ask you, for someone to own, going through this, getting it right. And we also need to make sure that Beau has any of the baseline knowledge to counter any of these areas because – tell me if I'm wrong, Alan, I don't believe he has.

Alan Greenberg: I would suggest it might be problematic.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: Okay. I'm all set. I'm going to leave you.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Thanks.

Alan Greenberg: Thank you, Fatimata.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Thank you very much, Fatimata.

Fatimata Seye Sylla: You're welcome. And thank Allah. Bye-bye.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Alan, do you – call Beau and say we've discussed this matter. We were most concerned about the errors and inaccuracies in it and someone is going to write to Jolin (ph) and let her know that – or is it he? I'm not sure.

Sebastien Bachollet: He.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: He. He know that it's just not right. It would be better if it was right. But also ask Beau what his pitch, what's he doing, is he going to make it clear that he's not there as a formal representation of the At-Large Advisory Committee? And we--.

Alan Greenberg: --And I – Cheryl, can I ask you to identify the inaccuracies that you have found?

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Well, the interim--.

Alan Greenberg: --No, no, no. I don't mean in this call. Just send me a brief email. I just want to make sure I haven't missed some.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Do not ask me to do anything today, Alan.

Alan Greenberg: That's the position I'm in, also.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: But that's alright. I know.

Alan Greenberg: Okay. Or tell me and I'll write them. I'll put white-out on my screen.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay. If somebody who is a now second, if not third term representative of North America in the ALAC doesn't know that the ALAC isn't an interim measure, I've got real problems.

Alan Greenberg: I understand. I just want to make sure I haven't missed one. What I'm gonna do is I'm gonna get hold of Evan. I think he's in a better position to do this than I am.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Let me count the ways. Beau is ill-prepared to represent the ALAC with historical facts and background. So, we can do two things; help him if he needs to or wants to bring any of them forward. And that may mean someone being online and supporting him while he is making these presentations. Secondly, we have no idea what if any details of the presentations he might be going to do. If he's making it as consumer/writer to a blog and has no association with ALAC in that role, I don't have a problem with that. He can say anything he bloody well likes. But right now I read that and I don't see that he isn't going to be interpreted as representing the ALAC.

Alan Greenberg: He is going to be--.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: (Inaudible.)

Alan Greenberg: ALAC is going to be attacked there whether – regardless of whether he defends it or not.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yes. Yes (inaudible)--.

Alan Greenberg: --And he's the only one – he's the only one on the premises who could defend us.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: He loses his temper and he makes us all look bad. At least he can do it with facts.

Alan Greenberg: Yep.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: And that concerns me greatly. And I think as the ExCom we should be very concerned about it. And I don't care whether staff call him, you call him or the Goddess herself does, but someone needs to.

Alan Greenberg: Let me see what I can do.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: But it can't be me because I'm furious.

Vanda Scartezini: Well--.

Alan Greenberg: The relationship between Beau and me is not the best, so--.

Vanda Scartezini: -Well, I have a-.

Alan Greenberg: --It probably shouldn't be me, but I will talk to Evan to start with.

Vanda Scartezini: Yeah. I have a good relationship with Beau.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: (Inaudible.)

(Inaudible - multiple speakers.)

Alan Greenberg: I can't hear when three people are talking.

Vanda Scartezini: Yeah.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Go ahead, Vanda.

Vanda Scartezini: Vanda talking. I have a very good relationship with Beau. We always are chatting. And I can make the question. I have no problem with that.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay. Well, someone needs to.

Vanda Scartezini: Alright.

Alan Greenberg: Okay. If you're going to do it directly, then I will read it over and send you a list of what I think are the inaccuracies. The preparation and what he's going to speak to, you're gonna have to just ask him.

Vanda Scartezini: Yeah. But I agree with you. I haven't seen it. I agree with Alan that maybe Evan, as the head of the NARALO should be the best one to do that.

Alan Greenberg: Okay. Vanda, how reachable are you?

Vanda Scartezini: I'm easily reachable.

Alan Greenberg: Okay. I'll try to get hold of Evan this evening. I don't know whether he's available or not. And I will get back to you by email or Skype.

Vanda Scartezini: Okay. No problem.

Alan Greenberg: Okay?

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Can I just ask staff? I really think Nick needs to know about this. Nick has a very good relationship with Evan – sorry, with Beau, as far as I know.

Vanda Scartezini: Yeah. That would be good, too.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: And there are a couple of layers of concern here, some of which I think the Director of At-Large should be bringing up with one of the ALAC members.

Vanda Scartezini: Okay. That'd be good. Less formal.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yeah, that's formal.

Heidi Ullrich: If I have this correct, you would like Vanda to speak directly to Evan and then Nick to speak directly to--.

Vanda Scartezini: --No, not Evan, to Beau. This is for me to do? I speak with Beau. Beau is much more close to me than Evan. If it's to speak to Evan, Alan is the best one to do.

Alan Greenberg: No. I was only going to speak to Evan because I don't think me talking to Beau is effective. Is someone – if either Vanda or Nick can talk to Beau, that's likely to be more direct.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: And Heidi, just to make clear, I also think Nick needs to make sure that the errata is corrected and that Beau has the correct information, as well as note our concern that, you know, even though he's not there formally as an ALAC representative, he's going to be assumed to be and that we are more than happy to help, but we would like to know what's going on.

Vanda Scartezini: Okay, that's fair. Ask Nick to do that. I don't (inaudible) this kind of thing.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: I mean, this is likely to be a mixed PR disaster.

Alan Greenberg: Okay. Just for the record, this is happening 48 hours from now. So, we cannot wait too long to do this.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Exactly right. But it's going to be potentially a PR disaster. And I really think someone needs to be online and involved, if not in the room and involved.

Alan Greenberg: Well, assuming he's going to be online at the time. I don't know what facilities they have wherever it is.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Well, if he's got his computer open, I'd like to think he could at least have some Skype input from us.

Alan Greenberg: Only if he has Internet connectivity, Cheryl.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay. Fair enough. I didn't know New York has as many problems as Sydney.

Alan Greenberg: I don't have a clue what Warren-Weaver Hall is. It's in the University. It's probably a (inaudible)--.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: --Well, it's going to be steamed, video streamed out.

Alan Greenberg: You're right. Touché. Touché.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: You know?

Alan Greenberg: Okay. Heidi, you will get hold of Nick. I don't know when – whether it's too late now or first thing in the morning.

Heidi Ullrich: It will be first--.

Alan Greenberg: If Nick cannot do it, we need to know very quickly so someone else can try.

Heidi Ullrich: Okay.

Alan Greenberg: Whenever we finish this item, I remembered what my other one is.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay. I think it's yours.

Alan Greenberg: Okay. I would like to ask staff, and this is in the form of Heidi, to check with ICANN constituency travel on behalf of ALAC management and find out whether all ALAC members and all travelers have been informed of their hotel, number one. Number two, when will we get confirmation numbers for the hotel so we can verify that the dates are correct? And number three, when will per diems be transferred?

Heidi Ullrich: I'm happy to say that I have already contacted them, but I will follow up personally after this call.

Alan Greenberg: Thank you very much. And yes, we understand you're not responsible for it, but perhaps you can talk to them and get an answer more directly than me going to the chief financial officer.

Heidi Ullrich: We sit next to each other, so I – depending on the first one's response, I will then move on.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: (Laughing.) Thanks, Heidi. That's (inaudible)--.

Alan Greenberg: --And in previous jurisdictions, we did finally get to the point where we got hotel confirmation numbers. Several times in the past we have found out that, despite all of the best information, they booked the wrong days. It would really be nice to verify that this wasn't the case this time. And real confirmation numbers that the hotel chain knows about are usually the way. Done.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay. Alright. Well, thank you all. A bit of a heroic meeting, but there's also been a number of things that we needed to go through. So, thank you all and--.

Heidi Ullrich: Cheryl?

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yes, Heidi?

Heidi Ullrich: Sorry, just one issue. Did you want to bring up what we talked about earlier with LACRALO?

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Oh. God, yes, I do. Sorry. Glad one of us is still capable of intelligent thought. Clearly, it's not me.

Vanda – it might have been the point Vanda was going to bring up. Vanda, what were you going to say first?

Vanda Scartezini: I have no problem. I haven't heard what Heidi has said.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Oh, okay. Sorry, I thought you had a – I heard your voice.

Vanda Scartezini: No.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Heidi asked whether or not I wanted on the agenda for today's meeting the matters of the recent rush of resignations from LACRALO.

Vanda Scartezini: Ah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: I said I didn't want it on the formal agenda because I'm aware (inaudible) supposed to be confidential.

Vanda Scartezini: Yeah. I'm supposed to talk with – yeah. I'm supposed to talk with (inaudible) to understand (inaudible). I've seen all the – what Heidi is telling us about what's going on. But I do prefer to call Eric. He understands better this situation.

Alan Greenberg: Can we hear who has resigned?

Vanda Scartezini: Eric. (Inaudible.)

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Heidi?

Heidi Ullrich: Yes?

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Vanda, one moment. Heidi, as far as I know, this is the – with Eric it'll be the third LACRALO ALS that's left us since March this year.

Heidi Ullrich: Well, I think it's – it will be the second because the one is inactive and that one I need – we're still confirming. Is that correct, Matthias? The one that Sylvia pointed out?

Matthias Langenegger: That's correct, yes. I sent him a note today and I haven't actually heard from him personally that he wanted to resign.

Vanda Scartezini: Yeah. The other is one in Mexico.

Heidi Ullrich: Yeah. Vinnie Qular (ph)?

Vanda Scartezini: Yeah. And Eric now. Eric – I know – Eric is some way in the governance right now.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: He's the head of LAC TLD at the moment, isn't he?

Vanda Scartezini: Yes. And he is – he joined the governance some time ago. So, I believe he is still there. But I believe that some of – suspect; I don't know – I suspect there is something behind the scene in this movement. So, I need to talk with him to better understand that.

Alan Greenberg: So, maybe you need to do that and then send us some private email.

Vanda Scartezini: Yeah, yeah. It's a more directly talking with Eric. We are friends from long time. So, I believe it's most important to know from him directly what's going on.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yep. Vanda, can I suggest then, and this is why I wanted it off the books while we discuss this, that we leave it not totally off the books, but we record in the minutes and the notes on the wiki from this meeting that the ExCom is concerned that regions, when they have inactive ALSes – when they're reviewing and find inactive ALSes, or when an ALS chooses to resign or leave, that some form of exit and reason information is expected from that and that we realize this may mean from time to time that this might need to be handled confidentially or outside of the regional representatives appointed to the ALAC.

Vanda Scartezini: Yes.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Because it may very well be that it would be better for staff to interface in this particular system. And we might need to put out some standard operational procedure for it.

Vanda Scartezini: Okay.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: But if it's (inaudible) building and personality issues, then that needs to be dealt with very differently because sometimes all you need to do is change the personalities and not actually lose the whole ALS.

Vanda Scartezini: Yeah.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: But that's something that needs to be entertained first.

Vanda Scartezini: Yeah. Well, I will try to call him. He is three hours behind. So, I believe around noon here tomorrow I will try to call and to understand what is really going on.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay. And can we then have on our ExCom agenda for the meeting after Seoul, and then on the ALAC agenda for the meeting after that, the whole matter of review of ALSes and regional makeup. The ALS makeup of the region is what I'm trying to say.

Heidi Ullrich: Vanda, could I just make a point--.

Vanda Scartezini: -Yes-.

Heidi Ullrich: --In terms of timing?

Vanda Scartezini: Yes.

Heidi Ullrich: Nick stressed to me that it is very urgent that – if you could talk with Eric today because Eric has already notified staff that we are to post the resignation. So, if you can call him today to perhaps postpone that, that would be very helpful. I'm afraid that tomorrow would be too late.

Vanda Scartezini: Okay. Well, let's see if I found him here, if he's connected or not.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: And can I ask staff, is the resignation with reason or without reason?

Heidi Ullrich: Currently it is without reason. I can send you the information.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: No, that's less important than what the community archive shows. I think we need to look at differences between accepting resignations or dissolutions of an ALS under different criteria, which is why I want to deal with this in our next active term in some form of operational procedural process. If it's a with reason, then sometimes that could be really good. If it's inactive, then sometimes that can be revisited. But no one has any idea of whether they should go back in two years time and revisit and perhaps see if you can get another ALS going out of the same fallow field unless reasons are given. And we all know that sometimes these can be work related or politically related, but that's okay. And sometimes it can be given with no reason. But if it's been given with no reason, you should be able to say no reason because there isn't one or no reason because it's withheld.

Vanda Scartezini: Okay. Heidi? Do you have a recent telephone number for Eric? Because--.

Heidi Ullrich: --I have – I sent the two that I have in the email a few hours ago.

Vanda Scartezini: Yeah, yeah. (Inaudible.)

Heidi Ullrich: I believe--.

Vanda Scartezini: (Inaudible) different.

Heidi Ullrich: There was a message on the first one that I could not understand. And on the second one, I believe that number is no longer valid. At least how I was dialing it.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: When you speak to Eric, Vanda--.

Vanda Scartezini: --I will try right now.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay.

Vanda Scartezini: Just finished the call. I will try to call again.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: You might just mention some of what Nick outlined that, without the ALAC executive knowing what the reasons are, because we don't, we are most concerned that we reach out to him at this critical point, recognizing his original status and hard work in the formation of the ALAC, etc., etc., etc., etc.

Heidi, does that do what was needed?

Heidi Ullrich: Yes. I think that sounds wonderful. Thank you very much.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay. Alright. Have I forgotten anything else? Speak now or forever hold your peace. Okay. Well, I think this might actually be officially a marathon. We may--.

Sebastien Bachollet: --Sorry. Vanda, you don't have Eric on your Skype?

Vanda Scartezini: Yeah--.

Sebastien Bachollet: --I guess he's connected.

Alan Greenberg: I'm gonna drop off now. Three hours into a one-hour call is more than I can take at this point.

Vanda Scartezini: Sebastien?

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Alan, I've been on the phone for long enough.

Sebastien Bachollet: Yes?

Vanda Scartezini: For some reason he is not in mine.

Alan Greenberg: Goodbye, all.

Vanda Scartezini: (Inaudible.)

Heidi Ullrich: Goodbye, Alan. Thank you.

Matthias Langenegger: Goodbye, Alan.

Vanda Scartezini: --Connected now. But you have him connected?

Sebastien Bachollet: Vanda, I am not sure but I have – it's a strange name, but I guess it's (inaudible). Do you know if this could be him?

Vanda Scartezini: What is the spelling that?

Sebastien Bachollet: Yeah, wait a second. I will put that on your--.

Vanda Scartezini: Yeah, put in the ExCom chat.

Sebastien Bachollet: In your own, Vanda – in your Skype.

Vanda Scartezini: Okay.

Sebastien Bachollet: I have this name. Just have a look to that, if you think that--.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: --I don't have it at all so I can't check.

Vanda Scartezini: Okay. I will try to--.

Sebastien Bachollet: I can try to ask him if he's Eric and I will tell – I will let you know.

Vanda Scartezini: Okay. Okay. Okay, so bye.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Bye-bye.

Sebastien Bachollet: Okay. Bye-bye. Thank you very much.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Heidi and Matthias?

Heidi Ullrich: Yes?

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Are you guys going to be on the 24x7 chat for a moment?

Heidi Ullrich: I'm not sure that Matthias is going to be much longer awake here.

Matthias Langenegger: Yeah. It's like 1:00 in the morning.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: That's fine. He can catch up with it later.

Matthias Langenegger: Alright.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Thank you very much. It was a bit of a marathon. But Heidi, it's something Matthias is used to doing in the past. We need to get gifts organized for the outgoing ALAC members for Seoul.

Heidi Ullrich: Okay. Absolutely.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: (Inaudible) and I are going to talk about that.

Heidi Ullrich: I'll be on the Skype chat. I'm just going to go away for a few minutes and then I'll be back.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Probably for the same reason I'm going to go away for a few minutes. And I've been on calls like Alan has. So, many more hours than this call. We started at, my time, 5:30, so--.

Heidi Ullrich: Wow. Actually, while I'm out there I'm going to go upstairs as well to go talk about the issues Alan asked me to look at. Okay?

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Alright. Thanks, all.

Heidi Ullrich: I'll be back in about 5 or 10 minutes.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: (Inaudible) appreciated. Bye.

Heidi Ullrich: Thanks.