Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay can we quickly do attendees. I think we have everyone who is here listed. There are noted apologies from Olivier, Tijani, and Sergio. We have Natalia, on the Spanish channel, and myself. We unfortunately find ourselves yet again unrepresented by Africa, which is a concern and I might ask staff to just make sure that if someone is apologizing from a region that you might poke the other person from the geographic locality anyway.
Last week Starla found the hour of this call a little too early for her, it's possible she may be finding it too early again. At least I can hold the APRALO hat for a little while. Moving on to our next agenda item after attendance we have our usual exciting review of where we are and what we were doing last week. To that end we had some action items which actually were for us all, all of the Task Force should review each of the individual recommendation pages as was listed in the agenda for last week’s call.
And we were looking towards assigning a status and editing these pages and also thinking about it if not actually noting on the pages any required next steps that we thought was worthwhile. And we looked at an example with Recommendation 2 in the agenda last week. Seeing as I subscribed to any updates on all the Wiki pages and I haven’t been very busy seeing any of them, I thought what we might do is hand our homework in during the call this week, so collective sigh of relief.
Thank you one and all and that will allow us to discuss this as a group, as a whole but we will need to start pressing for these meetings and doing a little bit of homework if we’re going to move at the pace we need to. The second action item was on staff and myself to update and arrange and modify Wiki pages and various portals, that is a work in progress. The staff of [inaudible 00:02:46] is now finished so might having our [inaudible 00:02:50] all the assistance we give and that will be on our to-do list for this week and probably some of it will be ongoing.
The third and final action item from last week was staff and myself to arrange a between meetings leadership get together or meeting between the ALAC chair, the Director of At-Large, relevant staff members she decides was needing to be on the call and myself and any leadership for a particular breakout groups that we may form from time to time for premeeting planning, action item checking and longer term agenda setting. Olivier as the chair of ALAC and myself did manage to have a short call this week but we limited it to just discussing the agenda for today.
Interpreter: Excuse me Cheryl this is the interpreter speaking, sorry for interrupting, can you please speak up, your voice is very faint and it's hard for me to interpret you.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: I'm afraid Adigo will have to do something about that because I am not using a headset.
Interpreter: If someone can do something about that I will appreciate it.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: [Inaudible 00:04:09].
Interpreter: Okay.
Matt Ashtiani: Cheryl this is Matt.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Is anyone else having problems from the audio from me?
Matt Ashtiani: Can you slow down just slightly.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: I have no problem slowing down, it was volume.
Matt Ashtiani: I'm having trouble keeping up with the typing if you could just slow down. Honestly it's very slightly [inaudible 00:04:33].
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Well you can hit record and deal with it later Matt. I'm interested if the Spanish interpreter doesn’t have enough volume that needs to be fixed.
Interpreter: Yes, I would appreciate it, thank you.
Matt Ashtiani: I will work on that but I don’t actually -
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Well we are doing our best.
Matt Ashtiani: It may take some time for me to actually [inaudible 00:04:51]. Okay Cheryl?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: That’s not a problem but we do need the interpreter to be able to have enough volume. I would’ve thought that was an Adigo issue however being it's there services we’re using. Does anyone else on the call have a problem with the volume I'm speaking at?
Gisella Gruber: Not at all.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: No I wouldn’t have -
Male: Well you sound fine to me.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay Gisella we might just note that this seems to be more of a technical issue than it is from a speaking from the [antipodes] issues I suspect. And for ongoing interpretation it's very difficult if we can't enough volume into the interpreter network. Back to the final part of the AIs which were the regular intercessional meetings. Rest assured that will be organized and we will be getting all our calendar synchronized from this week on.
Moving from our AIs which took me slightly longer than I had hoped, we now need to move on to our next agenda item. First of all what I would like us to see whether or not we've got our volume up, are you able to hear me on the Spanish channel now better?
Interpreter: Yes, Cheryl thank you very much.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay hopefully whatever tweaking happened has worked.
Interpreter: Thank you.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Was there anything from last week’s meeting that any member of the task force wants to raise just before we get into the serious work of today's meeting? Not seeing anybody raising hands in which case other than a rush to do ones homework, how are we going getting that file up?
Matt Ashtiani: Once your [inaudible00:07:05] the AIs I will get it up right now.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay yes I wouldn’t be quite so concerned about the AIs because we can always catch up on those later. Just reporting on AIs down, so we haven’t set any AIs for today's meeting yet. If we now look at the review that of course we've all done, we've all looked at all the recommendations and we've studied all of the pages and we've decided what status we think they have. And have compared them to the abridged or full version of the Task Force haven’t we?
I'm sure you're all saying yes and I just can't hear you. We are not going to spend the time going over the tables again at this meeting. Seth gave us a very good review of them last meeting. What I would like to do is now actually use one of those tables which is the full version table. I thought that might have been more suitable for our purposes. But if you look to the next agenda item which is where we’re into now, the discussion -
[Spanish Interpreter is talking over]
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: We are now getting the Spanish audio in the English channel but that has been fixed, thank you. We’re going to have a discussion now and just double check that we all understand where we are with each of the recommendations. In the agenda I have a link to both the abridged and the full table. We will be using the full table as you can see in the shared screen in front of you now. And in future weeks what we will be doing is with this particular copy but also on the Wiki we will have to tweak the Wiki so we can have an extra column in the table.
We will be annotating any notes and any changes in status and any tasks we need to do for each of them. If you're all happy to start from the top which is actually the easiest one of all because of course Recommendation 1, 1-1 and all the ones that go below it, say ‘Completed.’ And in fact, what we need to do as our first decision is to agree that the Part 1.4 at the bottom of Page 1 which is where I hope I have you all on your shared screen now, where is says “Form a Working Group to conduct a complete review of ALAC’s rules of procedure must begin.
We can actually agree that that is now being done. So that’s an action that is current. What we do need to do is give that work group which has yet to have its first meeting, a deadline. Our task will be to fit timelines into what that work group will need to do. Matt I have no edit control because you're running that document, so perhaps either Seth or you could just make a small note that that would be the first of the changes from our work that we would be making to this existing documentation.
Does everyone see where we are going with this now? We will be going down line by line and quite literally changing the status. Obviously we’re not going to be changing anything from ‘Complete’ to ‘Incomplete.’ But if it's ‘Incomplete’ we will changing it to where we think it is as a status and what we need to do. We need to note that the work group has been formed. We should put a link into this column to the work group Wiki. And we need to set some timelines for that work group.
There is no issue in Recommendations 1 that have not been dealt with. We don’t need to address that next box. Recommendation 2 as we noted last week is the Seat 15 in the ICANN Board of Directors, the voting seat for a Director to be having been selected by the At-Large community that has been done. We will now move to Recommendation 3. Now Recommendation 3 is one where we’re going to have to have considerable discussion and this is where I would think we will be spending the next few minutes of our call, if not a considerable number of minutes of our call looking at where we think the status is for each of the subunits here in Recommendation 3.
For the record, Recommendation 3 is that ALS, RALO, and ALAC Structure, the three-tiered structure of At-Large should remain in place for now. The Work Team B proposals that we now need to implement is first of all, the establishment of a work group to ensure that the information already available is organized properly and easily accessible by end-users. We will go to the next one and then we will come back to discussion on that first point. They also recommended that we introduce to the ALSs the At-Large structures selected information, dissemination, communication and collaboration tools.
The proposal specifically there was that we may have a small group of technical expertise who could act on that advice. And I am delighted that Dev is in this task force because he was someone who was quite instrumental in that recommendation. Guess who is going to be running that Dev? The next recommendation from Work Team B was that they proposed a promotion of [inaudible 00:14:16] use of the At-Large calendar to the ALSs.
We need to discuss that. And I suspect that might be something we want to interact with ICANN staff more deeply with. And finally on Recommendation 3 that we create and distribute a brief orientation instruction package about the information, dissemination, communication and collaboration tools as an introduction to ALSs since we parted the ALS starter kit. And at the point where we discuss this I would like to ask Heidi or the appropriate staff to bring us all up to speed on the ALS Starter Kit. That’s probably the first big bite of work that we’re going to do today. And if we get no further than that today then that won't be a bad thing. But if we do that will be excellent.
Coming back top the establishment of a work group to ensure that At-Large information already available is organized properly and easily accessible by end-users. The ALAC has accepted this report but has not adopted this action as yet. And I think we should probably note that with a new ALAC it may indeed be looking at changes to the way it's Wikis are organized and in the absence of Olivier I would like to ask Heidi if there is anything that we as a task force need to know about what ALAC will be doing or is thinking of doing or indeed Heidi what you're thinking of doing in terms of the way our organization - sorry our information is organized accessed, over to you Heidi.
Heidi Ulrich: Thank you Cheryl. You're talking about the first role correct, the working group?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Correct.
Heidi Ulrich: I think it would be up to the working group to decide that.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Actually Heidi this is a recommendation to the ALAC to form a working group. The ALAC has not formed such a working group. Now we can simply say to the ALAC they need to but that’s a tiny bit presumptuous if the ALAC has some plans already or if you and Olivier are aware of changes in Wiki and Wiki design or ICANN website design, for example, which we know is changing. That will in fact make some of what a work group would do redundant.
Heidi Ulrich: Okay well a couple of things I know that are underway. The first is the overall ICANN change and improvements to their website and I have heard from Scot Pinson that once completed it will be far easier to find the At-Large pages, web pages. That’s one. The second point in terms of our use of Wikis is that we are - one of the action items coming out of Dakar is that Matt and I will be working to improve or to clean up the Confluence Wiki pages which is ongoing.
And thirdly, is staff will be creating a page that has as a repository for all of the existing outreach documents that are available including the ALS Starter Kit and the Power Point that Sebastien Bachollet created on At-Large, including all of the outreach, the RALO brochures, the diagram, etc.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: That’s exactly the sort of information, yes. My concern with - Heidi thank you for those few brief points and I am sure there is a lot more. My reason for asking you to do this right now was to pose to the task force that this is one of those items of work which whilst it's in progress perhaps should be looked at as a possible reedit and perhaps even a small team of this task force should own the work on this for a short period of time. Let me give you my rationale.
If we were to - and we could at the very next meeting of the ALAC - recommend as a task force that they have to form a work group. And they would do so and in a month or so we would have a new work group. And then that work group would start meeting. And it appears to me that that work group would probably be some of the usual suspects that are on this call anyway. And that there is work already being done such as Heidi has just outlined that we need to wait for anyway.
What's the feeling of this grouping here? We can leave it in progress. We can pick it up closer to the next meeting of ICANN and have it even as a reportable and ongoing - that is linked to activities outside of At-Large and in the general ICANN space, if need be. But should we form a small subgroup, two or three of you, who keep an eye on this and see how the organization of information is working and where the interface is with the ICANN space and what's already planned for the At-Large web pages and Wiki.
I have an indication from people whether you think that’s a good way forward or should we just stick rigidly to what is written in front of us?
[Julio Carmaren]: It seems to me that since all these things that Heidi mentioned are in the works so that it would not serve any good purpose to establish a working group now. why don’t we wait and see what comes out of those initiatives, both ALAC and ICANN level and then decide whether some action is needed like what you said, a few people, just taking a look at what has been achieved.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Thank you, I am calling for anyone else who would like to comment or contribute on this discussion on this point. Just jump in or raise your hand if you feel you need to. If you are going to jump in, do say your name before you speak. Go ahead Dev.
Dev Anand Teelucksingh: Thank you Cheryl. I agree with what you said Cheryl. I think we should have a small number of us as the working group and just monitor what changes are forthcoming to the ICANN.org website. I think then start the actual Wiki documentation for the information, dissemination and so forth. I do think that we may not be able to rely on the ICANN.org’s redesign. And I think the reason why, it came up in the gTLD working group is that is it's hard to find a history of a topic that’s been worked on in At-Large.
If in like the new gTLDs for any new person coming into this, I think it's very hard for them to really get the grips of where we started and where we are now. I don’t know what - the thing is I know it's a lot of work to actually organize it. It sounds easy but - I think it needs to start on maybe on one topic and then see how that goes and see how we organize it, how that works. And then once we have that template out properly, then we just do it for all the additional topics, WHOIS, etc. That’s it.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay, so what I'm hearing from you Dev if I may paraphrase is a need to be effective and to hasten slowly but not rely on the wider ICANN website review and remodeling to happen to meet our needs. That we need to start getting our own house in order any way, is that a fair?
Dev Anand Teelucksingh: Yes, I agree. I could be wrong but I don’t think that the redesigned ICANN.org website would have the history of what ALAC did to get to that final statement. Yes, I agree with you.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay, alright, Heidi if I may ask you to respond with a little more detail on one of the things you briefly introduced. You were saying that there is an intention to have some portal or access space Wikis where resources about ALAC are going to be aggregated, to that extent it would probably help us with sort of a history of where we are and what we've done.
But Dev has introduced a very important point and that’s not so much the history of us but the history of what we do. In other words the policy documentation, the ways that different draftings have been done and established and what has or has not become a statement or otherwise. Is there intent to perhaps look at that as well or as part of what you were suggesting?
Heidi Ulrich: No, not in any great detail. This portal was basically going to be strictly used for a source of outreach materials that ALSs and RALOs could use to engage new people or raise awareness of existing - for existing ALSs on what At-Large and what ICANN is doing. In terms of the - what Dev was mentioning - I am not clear on what Dev is asking for. To me it seems like that would be the entire Wiki. If you wanted to find the history of a certain document you would need to go to the Policy Development Wiki page that is already in the gateway section in terms of its importance.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Dev can you respond to Heidi’s query?
Dev Anand Teelucksingh: Yes, well maybe we just need to organize it better then because I find it very difficult to find the information on the Wiki as to - like for example, WHOIS, I've been following the discussion on the WHOIS on the At-Large list and I'm thinking I'm interested in this. But if I was to try to find the history behind this and what ALAC has stated in the past and so forth, I'm not sure I would know where to start.
Heidi Ulrich: Okay I am clear on that now. You’re not asking for this to be added to the outreach page. You're asking for this to be added to perhaps a working group on WHOIS or to have an area where major At-Large policies are documented and the history is set out.
Dev Anand Teelucksingh: Yes.
Heidi Ulrich: Okay well I think that’s something that could be done not overnight but it could be noted.
Dev Anand Teelucksingh: Yes, indeed.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay well that to me sounds very much like two rather important strings to a rope of information that we need to weave from Recommendation 3. We still now need then to look at the very real issues of work that’s being done. Can I ask Heidi if you could drop us down to - because to some extent the orientation and instruction information that you’ve just referred to will be part of what you're doing.
But we do already have an ALS Starter Kit and I thought it would be good to talk in this space about what's already in it. And then see how or if much more needs to be done or with the plans for change already outlined, is there going to be much more that needs to be done on 3.1.3?
Heidi Ulrich: Okay I think the combination of the completed ALS Starter Kit and as well as the now in rough draft form the Beginners Guide to Participating in At-Large which we expect to be in final form by the Costa Rica meeting. Those two documents will make that point, I think, complete.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Excellent news so to some extent would or could perhaps move the status of 3.1.3, in other words, the last of the four parts listed in the Work Team B proposal to ‘In progress with intended closure by Costa Rica’ or ‘Major Milestone Closure in Costa Rica.’ We can shift the status of the first item which is the establishment of a working group to ‘On hold pending review of ICANN and ALAC/At-Large web interfaces and materials currently ongoing.’
If we jump to 3.1.2 which is the promotion of the At-Large calendar for the ALSs, I was under the impression at least from the regional meetings that I've attended recently that this was something that is being fairly well pushed, although might need to be marketed a little bit more aggressively by some of the regional leaders.
Heidi or perhaps Natalie or whoever is interacting on this, is that the case? Are we getting more wide use of the At-Large calendar or do we need to press it out to the ALSs or give it a performance indicator for regional leadership to see that it's done?
Heidi Ulrich: Gisella is able to answer that, she is the one who works on the calendar.
Gisella Gruber: I am here. Cheryl can you just repeat with regards tot eh calendar. Are we talking about the At-Large external calendar?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Use of the At-Large calendar by the ALSs or to the ALSs.
Gisella Gruber: Is that the At-Large External Events calendar which we populate with information received from global partnership in the ALSs? And then we otherwise the regular At-Large calendar which is on the ALAC or the front page of [inaudible 00:32:34] calls I populate that.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: I have noted in the chat space that Darlene doesn’t think that the NARALO region is making much use of it and that Natalia doesn’t believe that LACRALO is either. I am waiting for Dev to tell us what we he thinks seeing as he is secretary of that region. He may agree or disagree with her. Regardless if we have enough confusion as we seem to on whether the regions and ALSs are using the calendar it may be something that we should leave in progress but we take an action item to the regional staff to ascertain in a near future, preferably the next, regional meeting. What knowledge there is and what use there is being made of the very useful At-Large calendar. Dev go ahead please I see your hand raised.
Dev Anand Teelucksingh: Thank you Cheryl. I think the calendar is useful because otherwise we just get completely lost as to the timings. That being said I suspect what probably needs to be done is it's about organizing the calendar. Maybe we need to just have a dedicated Wiki page to the At-Large calendar to say here is the calendar. Here is how you can subscribe to the calendar. And use it and so forth. Once that is one link to just email all the ALSs and then I think the RALOs will be able to use it more.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Alright thanks Dev and I see Natalia agreeing. Darlene do you think that would be worthwhile from a NARALO point of view?
Darlene Thomas: Oh very much so and then the leadership can push it and start letting others think of using it and such like that. I know we haven’t had any discussions so I know that nobody is using it.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay that’s interesting because listening now what seems to be happening is a few people are using it and using it effectively and getting calendar updates and all sorts of things sent. For example, I know that Evan and I suspect Tijani but certainly myself and Olivier and a few others, anything that Gisella puts in the At-Large calendar is pushed to our own personal calendars so we know about it. We can either accept or reject the invitations.
That’s not a problem. But it means that we know what's going on and it certainly is a way that allows perhaps the ALSs to know more about the work group meetings that are going on and the policy development work that comes from those as well. this looks to me seems to be an easy win, one that we can progress relatively quickly if we were to have an action item out of today's meeting to look specifically at the promotion, including a how to and explanatory page in the Wiki, to make better use of the At-Large calendar to go out to the regional meeting agendas and to be promoted to the ALSs.
I think what we need to do is perhaps ask the regional representatives back to the ALAC at perhaps their January or February meeting to give some feedback from the regional leadership to see what has managed to get out to the ALSs and what perceived that might be. We could look at that as currently in progress and for reporting in January or February, let's make it January.
Which leaves us then on #3 and I think we are progressing well. If we continue with this pace for all the recommendations we will be doing very well indeed. But I suspect we may slow down on a few of them. To go to the introduction of ALS or to the ALSs of information and collaboration tools. To give some background the Work Team B proposals were quite specific and spent some time talking to the IT people in the ICANN world, if we’re going to have collaboration tools for use in policy development then they do need to be ones that are accessible and can be sustained and then indeed work cross-regionally wherever that is possible.
Clearly if ICANN is going to be acting as a facilitator or licensee of some of these things then the more that use it the better. Rather than everybody using all sorts of things, the suggestion from Work Team B was that there would be a small group of experts. And I believe at the Dakar meeting that Scot Pinson and also the IT guys were saying they would be happy to interact with such a work team or work group be formed.
And I know Work Team B was proposing that is be a cross-regional grouping basically to sift and sort and suggest and maintain a page of links of useful tools. This is another one which we should be able to progress relatively quickly but we do have to actually get the expert group put together and we have to get the space set up for it to operate with. Heidi do you have any limitations as far as you can see on us just asking ALAC to request this technical expertise group?
Heidi Ulrich: I'm sorry Cheryl we’re on -
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Do you see any reason or any limitation for us to just be asking the ALAC to simply create this technical expertise group that was spoken about in Dakar?
Heidi Ulrich: The only point I can see is staff bandwidth. But if some of the working group members can take the responsibilities for establishing this group, then no. Staff can support it but it would - it would necessarily need to be limited.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Sure. I'm wondering and if I could ask Dev, who I suspect will be part of this group, if not running it, how much staff support would be envisioned? You were integral to these proposals so I need to get your feedback Dev.
Dev Anand Teelucksingh: This is regarding the same Work Team B right? Introduce to the ALS selected information, dissemination, etc, right. Well I think yes staff bandwidth and At-Large bandwidth is also critical. I just feel we start slowly but surely. I think once we start putting together the documentation it then becomes easier and then this could raise more questions as how to improve our workflow and so forth so we can learn how to better syndicate the information to the At-Large. I think we just start taking a step as they say.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: You're suggesting we just do it?
Dev Anand Teelucksingh: Yes try putting our feet in the water and keep going in further and further.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay Dev. I'm not hearing, Heidi, a huge amount of staff support requirement from your staff although Matt I thought would be fairly integral in making sure there is an understanding and integrating and facilitation going on. There may be a need for ICANN IT and obviously Scot and some of his team to poke their nose into what's going on in this space from time to time and that should be managed through yourself or one of your staff delegates. And I noted you had your hand raised, do you want to say what you wanted to say and respond to that suggestion?
Heidi Ulrich: Yes, actually that is what I was going to suggest. But I would also add Silvia, the new At-Large regional manager who actually does have a technical background to some extent. I would like her to be involved in this as well. Could I just ask two things, one is Dev has he been appointed officially as the chair? And secondly what would be the deadline for this group? When could we change the status to completed?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay and I just wanted to before Dev commits himself too deeply, I didn’t actually necessarily think Dev was talking about the group being formed necessarily by the ALAC as such just yet but rather it could be more adhoc using the listing collaboration tools, Wiki, etc that we have and I've got [inaudible 00:43:44] material in such a space it will almost [inaudible 00:43:50] the talent. But perhaps I misinterpreted what he was saying. Go ahead Dev.
Dev Anand Teelucksingh: Actually Cheryl I think it's what you said and yes I will be happy to put in some work into getting this off the ground.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay - to answer you Heidi we should be able to be saying that this is a completed in as much as it is always going to be an ongoing activity but completed in as much as place and space prepared opportunity and mechanisms in place and some sort of moderation and facilitation going on. Dev what do you reckon mid-January?
Dev Anand Teelucksingh: Yes, I think that should be good.
Heidi Ulrich: Okay so it will be completed by mid-January and the completion objectives would be that the working group is in place and that there are mechanisms in place for ongoing work.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yes, Heidi would shift back from working group and go more for working space.
Heidi Ulrich: Okay adhoc working space.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yes.
Heidi Ulrich: Thank you.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: And then with the regions this would mean their February, their pre-Costa Rica meetings we might be asking them to perhaps invite some of us, if not one or two of us perhaps, to present to their regional meeting what it's all about and why they should be involved and why they should contribute and more importantly why they should use it. Well according to my clock and the birds outside my window we are coming towards the top of the hour, and I would like to spend just five minutes on any other business and next steps.
With your indulgence I would like to suggest we have pretty well put our first steps planning and status review for Recommendation 3 to its next stage at this meeting. I don’t believe that we will need to come back to Recommendation 3 at next week’s meeting other than for any update or action item reporting that was out of that discussion.
I think what we can do is be very pleased with our progress so far for a one hour meeting and say that we will be diving into the fill packed and exciting world of Recommendation 4 at next week’s meeting being treated in exactly the same way as we did Recommendation 3 today. And just to refresh you all, Recommendation 4 is all about engaging and educating the ALSs. We have our work cut out for us there. Dev?
Dev Anand Teelucksingh: Yes this is regarding Recommendation 2. Although that is now completed I know there are probably two things that need to be done either follow up to recommendation 2 that was a review of the ABTST group, right. And secondly I do recall from Cartagena that I believe ICANN Legal gave a presentation as to what was really expected of an ICANN Director. I think that material still needs to be collected and made available to the At-Large.
Because I think many At-Large representatives have certain misconceptions about what a Director is and is able to do and not able to do. I suppose it's probably an urgent timeline thing because I guess we’re not going to do the process until - I can't remember when but it's just something we have to keep on the agenda.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Thanks for that Dev and well called and what I might suggest is that we note that necessity for materials for that, excellent presentation out of Cartagena, that needs to become part of the to do list to make sure it happens for the work group that conducts the ALAC Rules of Procedure review because part of what they will need to do is make sure that on the ancillary documentation which is probably on Wiki pages to the rules and procedures [inaudible 00:49:52] standard operational procedures that they develop that things like job descriptions and requirements and performance indicators would be properly referenced.
Of course we do need to make sure it gets captured and it can be part of an action item on that working group. Not only do we need to give them a timeline we've given them a very specific task, as well. Thanks for that. Is there any other points on the items we've discussed? If not I will call for any other business. I don’t see any hands. Is there anything from the Spanish channel?
And just to recap the AI the second part of what Dev was talking about in terms of Recommendation 2 part of that will be going back to a subset of Recommendation 1, which of course is the work group conducting a complete review of the ALAC rules of procedure. Excellent at the top of the hour I would like to thank you all for your time, energy and input today on the call and trust that the action item on us for all our homework, same time, same place, same UTC time and day because we've received no request to change it otherwise, will be our preparation for Recommendation 4 and Recommendation 4 is quite a lengthy and quite an in-depth set of recommendation subsets, so happy reading. And talk to you all next week, don’t forget comment on the Wiki pages, they're 24/7, bye for now.
-End of Recorded Material-
