GISELLA GRUBER: I’d like to welcome everyone on today’s EURALO call, on Tuesday the 18th of December. It’s 9:00 UTC. On today’s call we have Wolf Ludwig, Adela Danciu, Yuliya Morenets, Olivier Crépin-Leblond, Sebastien Bachollet, Siranush Vardanyan, Yrjö Länispuro, Oksana Prykhodko, Sandra Hoferichter, Manuel Schneider and Narine Khachatryan. We have apologies from Christopher Wilkinson.
From staff we have Silvia Vivanco, Heidi Ullrich, and myself, Gisella Gruber. If I can also please remind everyone to state their names when speaking for transcript purposes, and also to note that Roberto Gaetano will be joining us sometime during the call. Thank you, over to you, Wolf.
WOLF LUDWIG: Yes, thanks a lot, Gisella, for this roll call. And maybe there will be (inaudible) joining us throughout the call. Let me continue with the second agenda item, that is a review of the action items from our last monthly call from 20 November. And basically there have been two points noted: Yrjö to draft a note or a letter regarding visas for future ICANN meetings. It will be followed up by EURALO sending an email to ALAC and this was done I think two weeks ago with Yrjö submitting a first draft.
We put it for consultation on the EURALO list. We received comments from Roberto Gaetano and from Manuel and both were included on the revised draft. And the revised draft was forwarded to At-Large staff who disseminated it to the RALO community for further comments. And I have not seen any further comments from any other RALO side or representative except Carlos who announced already its approval. And now the draft letter from our side is submitted to ALAC for further consideration and I guess it will be discussed and approved at the next ALAC meeting and then it will be sent by the Chair of ALAC, by Olivier to ICANN. So I think we can consider this agenda item as accomplished.
And the second one was to add the outreach events to the master plan. This was done by me and staff immediately after our last call. So I think we can consider all of our action items from the last call as accomplished. If there’s no questions or comments…
HEIDI ULLRICH: Wolf, this is Heidi?
WOLF LUDWIG: Yes, please, Heidi.
HEIDI ULLRICH: Yes, thank you Wolf, just an update on the previous action item that was still open and that was mine, to contact Breda Kutin at the Slovenian Consumers Association which is a EURALO ALS that we have not heard from in some time. I did so and she responded overnight, and she is interested in hearing more about the EURALO GA. So she may be coming to that, so that’s (inaudible).
WOLF LUDWIG: Okay, this is actually good news, Heidi. Thanks a lot for reminding me of standing action items from I think it was the September call, the October call. And I’m pleased to hear that this, as we called it ‘problem case’ so far, or we considered it as a problem case; but if she has expressed her interest to follow up from now on. And I think over the next couple of weeks we will have regular information on our mailing list on the planned General Assembly in Lisbon, and we will come to this agenda item later on. I think it’s Agenda Item #7, #6 or #7.
Next topic on today’s agenda is as usual the briefing on current ALAC considerations and initiatives, and it’s Olivier if he can still hear us. He’s not on Adobe Connect but he’s following the call, and I would like to give the floor to Olivier. Olivier, can you hear us?
OLIVIER CRÉPIN-LEBLOND: Thank you very much, Wolf. I’m just checking in at the moment. Unfortunately I don’t have any of the information in front of me so I might have to pass on this because I don’t know what current comment periods there are.
HEIDI ULLRICH: Wolf, this is Heidi. May I quickly go over those?
WOLF LUDWIG: Yes please. Let me suggest, Heidi, you go through it and you give Olivier the opportunity to make his comments.
HEIDI ULLRICH: Okay, I’m going to read these slowly. The recently approved ALAC statements are: the ALAC Statement on the ICANN Consolidated Meetings Strategy Proposal, and that was adopted on the 24th of November; the ALAC Statement on the IDN Variant TLD Program: Procedure to Develop and Maintain the Label Generation Rules for the Root Zone and Respective IDNA Labels – that was adopted on the (inaudible) of November; the ALAC Statement on the Expired Registration Recovery Policy – adopted on the 7th of December; and the ALAC Statement on the IDN Variant TLD Program Interim Report Examining the User Experience Implications of Active Variant TLDs – adopted on the 13th. So any comments there, Olivier?
OLIVIER CRÉPIN-LEBLOND: Thank you very much, Heidi, it’s Olivier for the transcript record. I just wanted to thank all of the people who have held the pen for those ALAC statements. It’s really important of course to remind everyone that anybody is able to hold the pen on any statement. So I would really look forward to having people from EURALO who would be wishing to move forward and pick up the pen on some of these statements. Thank you.
HEIDI ULLRICH: Thank you, Olivier, this is Heidi. Wolf, I’m going to just quickly read the statements currently being developed.
WOLF LUDWIG: Yes, go ahead.
HEIDI ULLRICH: Okay, the first is as we discussed the ALAC Demarche to ICANN. So again, the ALAC is going to be meeting at the ALAC Meeting on the 20th of December. The Trademark Clearinghouse Straw Man Solution is being developed and the good news is that the comment period has been extended recently to the 15th of January. So there will be more time now for the ALAC to draft that. And then finally the IDN Variant TLD Program Procedures to Develop… Actually, that one’s already been – oh, this is the second public comments… Actually I think that one has been [dusted] so we can go through that one.
And then there are a lot of open public comments. Wolf, would you like me to read those? There are a lot, 11.
WOLF LUDWIG: I think most of you who are in the Adobe Connect can read them by themselves so you get the overview of the currently open public comments. And in order to save a little bit of time for discussion I would like to ask Olivier, is there anything you had in mind or you had prioritized in your excellent brain that you would like to emphasize or you would like to encourage participants to take part in or contribute?
OLIVIER CRÉPIN-LEBLOND: Thank you very much, Wolf, it’s Olivier for the transcript record. And thank you for giving me that additional ten seconds to check in. I think we’re pretty much on course for all of the statements that are currently under the sort of comment period. I do have to thank EURALO for the excellent statements, specifically drafted by Yrjö Länispuro on the issue of visas which has been something that has really caused some problems for some of our travelers. And I hope that this will be, I think in the next few days this will be all put together and a final statement will be sent over to the Board.
Just from memory on the other statements that are being drafted I don’t have anything specific to say, just to ask everyone to check that the statements agree with what their points of view are and that’s really it. It’s coming to Christmastime and there’s not many left in the pipeline.
WOLF LUDWIG: Okay, thanks a lot. Let me ask our co-participants, do we have on any of the points under C – current or public comments, any of the issues – do you have any particular question to ask Olivier?
I see no hands raised, therefore I think there is no further urgent need for the call participants to go inside the ten, twelve points and consultations listed here. I think it’s another highlight in the At-Large success story, that last year to my memory we submitted more than 40 comments from the At-Large community to ICANN; and this year, if I counted rightly we will exceed 50. So it’s again another improvement, and I think this is really an impressing result regarding the inputs from the internet user side.
OLIVIER CRÉPIN-LEBLOND: Wolf?
WOLF LUDWIG: Yes, please.
OLIVIER CRÉPIN-LEBLOND: It’s Olivier, thank you – Olivier for the transcript record. I think the number of statements is one thing but the quality of the statements is another, and certainly the path that we have taken which is to explain our point of view – not only just making a statement but showing how we reached that process – is particularly important. And I have received a lot of very positive feedback from the Board, from the GNSO Council, from different parts of ICANN, really praising us for the quality of the statements we have produced and the helpfulness of them in the overall ICANN bottom-up process.
WOLF LUDWIG: Okay, thanks a lot for this additional elaboration, Olivier, and I think as no further questions or comments are raised on our Agenda Item #3 let me quickly continue with Agenda Item #4 – that is a briefing from the WCIT in Dubai. And it’s you who is foreseen as a short summary on this.
As you may have realized I have circulated via the mailing list a link to an article written by Wolfgang Kleinwächter who gives also an excellent overview about the WCIT. But Olivier, you now have the floor again.
OLIVIER CRÉPIN-LEBLOND: Thank you very much, Wolf. It’s Olivier for the transcript record. The meeting in Dubai was a very tense meeting as you might guess. The ITU is an organization that deals specifically with member states, so we’re dealing really only with governments and a few actors which are telecommunications companies that used to be government actors.
The [sector] members which are some civil society organizations and the Regional Internet Registries really have very little to say in ITU. It really is a government thing. Thankfully, many of the governments that were involved in the process brought in a multi-stakeholder group, so I was very lucky to be in the UK delegation but other delegations actually brought some people who actually work from ICANN circles; and actually also liaised with people back home that were part of At-Large Structures.
I think that overall we, as a group, have managed to somehow push off some of the worse legislation and articles that were going to be passed. And certainly there was one specific article which called for the naming and the addressing to be handed over to governments and that’s something which obviously take it away from ICANN. Thankfully this was repelled altogether and this was taken out by the Chair of the conference.
There were a number of other points which appeared to be dealing with content which weren’t in the same batch, and unfortunately they remained on the regulations. As a result, both the United States but also all the European chapters decided not to sign at the end and it was quite a dramatic end to the whole process. I think many of you might have read about it in the press or on other discussion forums. Ultimately some governments in Europe might decide to sign but with making reservations on some of the specific articles which were offending; for example, one about security which was a very general statement about security and which might include the access of people to networks – so you would probably need an ID card to be able to access the internet; another one on SPAM where it is specifically mentioned that SPAM is not about content. So there would be sort of governments working together to stop SPAM but not looking at content, and I’m not quite sure how that would fall because in order to decide if a message is SPAM you obviously have to read it or to look at at least the subject line of some sort.
So some of these statements, some of these recommendations made absolutely no sense at all. There was very good integration and work with ICANN itself. We had Nigel Hickson who was present locally, and he was of great help to be able to coordinate all of the work, and several people from other RALOs were also present. And it was of great help because that introduced some back channels – back channel communication between the different regions. The European region as I said was very much in the mind that the internet should stay out of the regulations but some other regions were of a different view, which therefore meant that they were voting for the internet to be included in the regulations. And that was a really hard fight that we had to undertake.
Thankfully as I said I think 55 countries so far have not signed. Some may sign, we’ll see who signs but this is just one of the many battles that are outstanding. And I’m of course very happy that the internet community as a whole, so not only people involved in ICANN but also other civil society organizations were able to coordinate so as to really make sure that the internet remains as it is. And that’s my report for the time being.
What I will be doing in the next few days is to write a full report to the ICANN Board to let them know of a few things that I have learned whilst being on the ground, for example the need for capacity building – perhaps not in Europe because it looks as though our governments are quite clued up now about things, especially the European Commission. And that’s of course due to the relentless work that EuroDIG has done in the past as well, and Wolf, you are one of the main drivers for this. So this is something really great for EURALO to have pushed through.
But some other regions are probably less well-informed about the multi-stakeholder model, and so there is a huge amount of work that the ALAC and At-Large will have to do to try and get those governments to understand what the multi-stakeholder model is; and perhaps bring them into the model, perhaps through the GAC, through the GNSO, through the ccNSO, etc. There’s a huge amount of work outstanding. So it’s really the beginning of a long, long process and I hope that it has also convinced or that it will convince the powers that be that provide funding for the type of outreach activities that At-Large does in respective countries, for these powers to actually understand the matters at stake now and how much funding needs to be really brought to local communities to make sure we’re not faced again with the same problems as what we’ve had here where the world’s really divided into two pieces.
You had the Western governments going in one direction and developing countries really being swayed toward the likes of China, Russia, Iran, Saudi Arabia. And I do name them because their interventions were very open in being hostile to the current multi-stakeholder model. We really have to try and have a hand to bring the undecided countries, particularly in Africa and some in Asia and Latin America forward into our model. That’s all. I’ve already been a bit too long on this so back to you, Wolf.
WOLF LUDWIG: Thanks a lot, this is Wolf Ludwig speaking. Thanks a lot, Olivier, for this excellent summary and briefing on the issue of the WCIT. I just see one more question raised by Oksana on the Adobe Connect: “Can you please explain to me why ITRs are seen as adopted if only 46% voted in favor?” I think this is much about the confusion raised when ITU announced because the WCIT can be only consensus and decisions by consensus, and there was this resolution that subtlety held the temperature in the room. And some understood it as a vote and others rejected it as this interpretation, and I think it varies the outcome as well.
Countries who signed it are in favor of the regime and a majority particularly from European countries were a minority, particularly from the European countries who didn’t sign so far and have announced they won’t sign this. They do not count this as binding or as an obligation in any sense. Do we have any further comments on this or a question, Olivier?
OLIVIER CRÉPIN-LEBLOND: Thank you very much, Wolf, it’s Olivier for the transcript record. Actually you’re absolutely correct, and Oksana is correct. Fifty-five countries decided not to sign but a larger number decided to sign. And so the majority one would say have decided to sign the ITRs. The only thing though that I would say is yes, they are nonbinding to some extent. There’s been a big question over the whole two weeks whether they should be binding or not binding. It appears that if a government decides to sign the ITRs and then ratifies them into their local law, at that point they make those binding. It really is up to the member country to choose whether they should be binding or not. That’s one position.
However, a number of countries that have signed have decided to add an additional statement with their signature, and have said that they reserve the right not to implement the recommendations themselves. I’m not quite sure what that means but it appears to be that they basically reserve the right not to be bound by those, and keeping all the options open. So that’s how it is at the moment – a very strange situation indeed for this.
That said there are some countries… I guess what the ITRs do is, I wouldn’t call it legalize but certainly put them on the right side of the regulations. If they want to perform any kind of de-packet inspection or if they wish to do things to the network which would affect the free flow of information and they ratify the recommendations, there would be nothing that one could say against them because al l they would say is that they are following the regulations. It just provides them with the green light to do so.
And but there’s a little bit of misunderstanding as to whether those are compulsory or whether those are just optional for the time being. I think that time will tell. It’s two years until the ITRs will actually come into effect and we’re probably going to see some movement on these before they move forward. Also to say that until then there will be an ITU Planning Potentiary Conference that will be taking place in addition to this, and several other meetings that will take place So as I said it’s only the beginning of a very long discussion and I might even call it a battle in the long term, but for the time being it looks as though we’ve got a draw with perhaps an advantage to those who defend the internet model, because it certainly was not expected of those people in the ITU that there was going to be so much opposition to the ITRs. Thank you.
WOLF LUDWIG: Okay, thanks a lot for this additional explanation, Olivier. There’s an exciting discussion going on in our chat room on this with some good comments and some links to further materials and background documents. I think you all have the opportunity to follow up with this in detail. I’m looking at my watch and I think we have progressed already with the time.
If there are no immediate questions asked regarding this agenda item, the WCIT – as Olivier said, he will write a report on ICANN for the subject with links to Wolfgang Kleinwächter’s articles. I can also recommend there was a very strong debate going on in the Internet Governance Project which is run by [Milla] who has written some very critical articles from his point of view. But even if you do not share the conclusions in many cases from Milla I think his capacity of analyzing certain things is good. So there are a variety of sources you can consult to follow up on the issue.
Thanks again, Olivier, for this very vivid and authentic briefing on the issue. Let me close this agenda item by just recalling that I’m somehow satisfied that various members from the EURALO community besides Olivier who was a member of the UK delegation – it was Wolfgang Kleinwächter who was a member of the German delegation. There was Bill Drake, a member of the US delegation and it was Avri Doria being also a member of a delegation – I don’t recall at the moment which one. But four people from our community were closely involved in the WCIT and they can give a personal point of view from their experience and from their observations. And of course you are free to contact them directly again for some further updates.
Let me continue with today’s agenda. The next agenda item now is an update on the ICANN Academy follow-up. We had this on the agenda on our last call when Sandra was not possible to follow. But now she can give you a new update, especially on the survey which is now conducted via the Academy Working Group. And the deadline for the survey was prolonged until the middle of January. Sandra, you have the floor.
SANDRA HOFERICHTER: Thank you, Wolf, it’s Sandra speaking. Can you hear me?
WOLF LUDWIG: Yes.
SANDRA HOFERICHTER: Okay, that’s great. During our meeting in Toronto we launched a survey and the survey was sent out by the beginning of December as I recall, if that’s right; and actually a deadline for replying to the survey by the 20th of December. We had some feedback on this survey which was good. We decided that we need to mobilize the various stakeholder groups more and we were given an extended deadline till the 14th of January – the 14th of January with regard to the seasonal breaks because people won’t be there at the beginning of January.
It is extremely important and I urge all the RALO and EURALO especially members to participate in this survey. I will post the link later in the chat room again. It is extremely important that you answer on the survey because if I look at the participant list today, I’m pretty sure that your answer is extremely important. Adela for instance, she’s involved in capacity building as well. It takes not more than five minutes. It’s a very short survey but it will give an overview about activities and needs for Europe especially, and this is important.
I sent the same request to other RALOs and they will answer on their region, on behalf of their region, but it would be good to have many people participate and not only one survey for each region because this gives more diverse opinions on the needs and possibilities in the region. So this is actually what I wanted to say. After we close the deadline on January 14th we will evaluate the outcome and we’ll see how we develop this project further. A lot of it depends on what is the outcome of this survey.
Another news is unfortunate news… Filiz Yilmaz did this line or she’s not working with ICANN anymore from the 31st of December so we will get a new staff contact for the ICANN Academy, which is Denise Michel. I don’t know her. We will see. I hope she will engage in this issue very soon because this is a very hot moment and we should not have any further delay on this. If you have any questions please let me know or you can also write an email. Thank you.
WOLF LUDWIG: Okay, thanks a lot, Sandra, for your explanations. Heidi added in the meantime the link to the survey in the chat room, and we encourage all of the call participants to participate in this survey. As you have heard the deadline was prolonged until the middle of January, and it would be great to have multiple feedbacks from our region as well. Any further questions regarding this agenda item?
SANDRA HOFERICHTER: Wolf, can I just add a little thing?
WOLF LUDWIG: Yes, of course. Please go ahead. Yes, go ahead Sandra.
SANDRA HOFERICHTER: Thank you, Wolf, it’s Sandra speaking. Just a small detail: if you submit a form, if you submit your submission form please indicate that you are from EURALO so that we know where this form is coming from. It is asked in the story which stakeholder group you belong to – put in EURALO. Thank you.
WOLF LUDWIG: Okay, thanks a lot Sandra for this additional information so it will be easier afterwards to do a sort of evaluation, also depending on feedbacks from the region. So don’t forget to mention and to identify yourself being a member of EURALO.
If no further questions are raised or comments are made to this agenda item, let me suggest we continue with our next one which is Point #6: EURALO planning 2013. We had started this discussion at our last monthly call in November and we had a first draft of a Master Plan for this planning process already. And I asked the participants from our last call to have a closer look at the draft Master Plan.
In the meantime we have also a preliminary budget estimation which was developed after repeated exchanges between Heidi, At-Large staff and myself. So this budget estimation is also already sort of a consolidated version but still preliminarily, it gives us some rough ideas about particular cost estimations in Euro and Dollar. And I think a lot of the calculations depend on one budget item, which is the cost for the flights where ICANN Constituency Travel had a much higher cost estimation so far. But I still hope that if we start with the planning of our next General Assembly right now, and if we try to mobilize our community over the next couple of weeks – the earlier we have feedbacks and confirmations from our members who will participate, who will come to Lisbon, the earlier we can do the booking for the flights. This may save us a lot of money to keep the limited budget.
And a third element of this agenda item is a draft circular mailed to the members, which I drafted some days ago. And I have posted it here for your consideration, and I would like from this agenda item today that we somehow adopt the draft Master Plan and we somehow have a look at the budget estimation – if we consider this as realistic or some people may have questions or remarks on it, including the draft circular mail. If we can adopt this at today’s monthly call, the circular, I will send this circular mail in the next days to inform our members at this very early stage and asking for feedback as soon as possible.
So probably some of you have seen the attachments to the agenda, and do you have any comments or questions on one of the items, either the Master Plan or either the budget or the circular mail? The budget you also see in the Adobe Connect. Here you see also the basis for the calculation. There are two options, two scenarios – one scenario is a sort of a 60% participation; the second scenario is an assumption of 80% participation, which will be then of course more expensive.
But these are rough estimates at the moment. I hope they are somehow realistic. If the 80% scenario would come true, on the one hand I hope we will have 80% of members’ participation in Lisbon; on the other hand it makes the whole thing more costly. And in that case we might slightly exceed the budget. In the given case we have to look for some sort of additional sponsoring or as mentioned before, I think we can save a lot of money with early booking of flights. And if only half of the members can go to Lisbon by EZ-Jet flights which are booked as early as a year, then even with 80% participation we can keep the budget.
And as we discussed on the last call, what was suggested by Heidi is I’d like to have the outreach perception included in our considerations and in our planning. I see no hand raised in the Adobe Connect so I consider this more or less as a sort of approval to the planning documents. But there is one point I would a little bit like to insist which is the draft Master Plan milestones for the EURALO General Assembly. And okay, draft planning and discussion on monthly calls – this is what we did so far so we can somehow consider it accomplished for December. WE said approval of plan and of circular mailed to the list, this first announcement of a face-to-face General Assembly in line with EuroDIG 2013.
Also we can consider this as a sort of an advertiser because it will be the first face-to-face General Assembly after 2009 Mexico City. And then real hard work will start beginning in January, this mobilization of our members by direct approaches – by mails, calls, SMSes, etc. We supported some focal points I suggest here, because according to my experience people generally, usually are rather very indifferent with mailings. They are rather hesitant with responding to it, etc. I hope that this announcement is interesting or attractive or incentive enough to many of our members to respond.
And to mobilize people, due to my experience, the most effective way to do this is a direct approach and direct contacts; and I have suggested for the focal points here this is part of the work distribution or we could also consider this as an organizing team for the GA – others are always welcome. I suggested Yrjö to follow up with ISOC chapters; here we have Finland, Netherlands, Belgium, Vilonia, Luxembourg, France, Catalan, Italy and Bulgaria. I noted Annette Muehlberg as a second focal point for the German ALS; Sandra Hoferichter also in the meantime informed me that she will assist to mobilize our German members. Lutz would be welcome in this process as well.
I think I can maybe count on Manuel for Austria and WikiMedia Chapter Switzerland. I can also take over [Klusit] in Italy and the Internet Users Association in Spain. I would like Oksana to care for the Eastern European members, in particular the individuals which are listed here; and staff will follow up with the consumer orgs – Heidi said already she revitalized the contact with the Slovenians. We still do not have any contact with KEPKA, our member in Greece. So this would be my suggestion to be discussed and adopted tonight for the distribution of the most important or the most difficult part of the mobilizing product, which is the direct contacts with members.
The other point is verification of suitable hotel rooms, etc…
HEIDI ULLRICH: Wolf, this is Heidi. Can you adjust your headset? We can’t hear you, please.
WOLF LUDWIG: It’s better now?
HEIDI ULLRICH: Very good, yes, that’s perfect. Thank you.
WOLF LUDWIG: Okay, probably I had turned the phone a little bit – sorry for that. This is a suggestion for the Master Plan, for the mobilization phase to be discussed and adopted tonight. And if we can agree and adopt these focal points I can count on your support and I’m confident that together we may mobilize a good or even a vast majority of our members for our next-phase General Assembly in Lisbon.
The rest of the points I mentioned under general (inaudible) is verification of suitable hotel rooms which is already in the loop. We have done this already, Sandra and I. We will be in Lisbon at the end of January for the open planning meeting for EuroDIG so we will have the opportunity to see the venue with meeting rooms at the Altis Hotel and we can also see the hotel rooms. And so far we have a sort of special offer for hotel rooms. If it is wished I can also verify potential alternatives.
So the practical issues are not so difficult. The most important is the social component. This is directly mobilizing each of our members and invite and convince them to come and join us in Lisbon. Any comments, remarks from your side? I do not… Yes, I see one hand raised in the Adobe – it’s Oksana. Oksana, you have the floor please.
OKSANA PRYKHODKO: Can you hear me?
WOLF LUDWIG: Yes, we can hear you.
OKSANA PRYKHODKO: Thank you very much, Wolf – it’s Oksana Prykhodko for the record. My question is about individual participants. What are their conditions for funding their participation? For example, maybe it would be better to send them to an organized ALS?
WOLF LUDWIG: The point is we cannot invite all the individuals who are listed in the Master Plan; we can only get funding for one of them under the certain conditions that they will now proceed with the creation of an ALS for individual members. Then they can discuss among each other who will be sent to the General Assembly but I can predict already some of the people I see listed under the individual members may have some other opportunities. Sandra and I, we are checking fellowships for EuroDIG in Lisbon and fellowships to people who may exist in the [art] process or who take over responsibilities during the event itself, like [promote] a participation moderator or responsibilities for sessional reporting, etc..
So we can discuss details of this over the next weeks but it would be good to start with a mobilization of individual members as well, particularly because it’s a pending task that we decided in Belgrade that we would like to have more individuals participating in EURALO. But to give them equal chances and to solve the question of voting rights they must organize themselves into their own ALSes. And there’s one name missing on my listings – this is Roberto Gaetano who is also an individual who announced his interest in future participation.
Okay, I’m just reminded one minute remains. I have Sebastien who raised his hand as well. Sebastien…
HEIDI ULLRICH: Wolf? Sorry, just a quick comment before Sebastien. That one-minute comment is just Olivier’s – it’s not for the group.
WOLF LUDWIG: Oh okay, thanks a lot – oof, partly relieved.
SEBASTIEN BACHOLLET: …as a group. It’s Sebastien, just to tell what I write, but I can help you if you want. I will help you with the French, for two of the French organizations as you said already on the call for the General Assembly – ISOC France and E-Seniors, and I can help with ISOC Italy as I am also a member of ISOC Italy. If you wish I can do that.
WOLF LUDWIG: This would be very helpful, Sebastien, thanks a lot for this offer. And I would like to note this after the call that we can count on your support regarding at least these three ALSes.
SEBASTIEN BACHOLLET: And you can count on my support generally speaking.
WOLF LUDWIG: Okay, great! And I hope in any case, Sebastien, as I said before I hope we will have you in Lisbon as well, not only for the GA but also as an input person for the EuroDIG.
SEBASTIEN BACHOLLET: I hope so, too, yep.
WOLF LUDWIG: Any further comments? Can I just, I’m a bit stubborn tonight but if I want that we approve this Master Plan I now will directly ask the people mentioned here as they are on the call. A question for Yrjö: Yrjö, are you willing to take over the ISOC chapters?
YRJÖ LÄNISPURO: Yeah, this is Yrjö Länispuro for the transcript record. Yes, I am certainly willing to do whatever I can. Thank you.
WOLF LUDWIG: Okay, thanks a lot. I think we will note this for the meeting and minutes. Annette is not on the call. I will follow up with Sandra bilaterally to get her confirmation. Oksana, I count on your confirmation as well.
OSKANA PRYKHODKO: Yes, of course I confirm. Thank you very much – Oksana for the record – but I would like to clarify questions on individual members. But we will discuss it with you personally later.
WOLF LUDWIG: Yeah, we will have opportunities to discuss this in detail. So this is general approval of the planning and of course anybody else, I also count on Manuel’s support and whoever has direct contacts with other member organizations – you are invited and welcome for any additional support. And as I said before, the crucial point is we have to do this in January or February because my goal is by the end of February to have a more or less complete list of potential participants for Lisbon. If this is the case as soon as we get confirmation we can start with booking of flights; and as I said we can save a lot of money.
Any further comments regarding the Master Plan? This is a rough planning scheme which gives some orientation. We had a similar thing when we organized the At-Large Anniversary Party in June in Prague, so this is a sort of planning instrument that may be useful and helpful. Any comments on the budget estimation or questions?
If not questions are raised, comments made, I think we can take this as approved as well by this call. And the third part is the draft circular letter. This is just a first announcement and an advertiser. I don’t count on plenty of reactions immediately on a first announcement but it’s a basis of references, etc., and it somehow prepares the ground for our follow-ups. And if you need any further additional information for your direct contacts please contact me directly and I can provide you with everything that we know at the moment.
No questions? No comments? Then I take the draft circular level and mail it to the members as approved as well. Anything I forgot? Anything you would like to add?
HEIDI ULLRICH: Wolf, this is Heidi.
WOLF LUDWIG: Yes, please Heidi.
HEIDI ULLRICH: Yes, just a question that I posted in the chat. Are the people who will be working to collect the ALSes or confirm the ALSes’ participation, will they be making up the Organizing Committee?
WOLF LUDWIG: Well, I wasn’t sure that it makes a lot of sense. Very personally speaking, my experience with organizing committees is rather ambivalent. Sometimes it works; sometimes it’s just a committee. Honestly speaking I would like to use every subsequent monthly call, from January, February, March onward with this group as more or less the reference or the org committee. Or we can amongst the focal points probably create a kind of a core team, etc., but I’m pleased about any support and any hand from any member.
Does this answer your question, Heidi?
HEIDI ULLRICH: Yes it does, thank you. So we can just make that a standing item.
WOLF LUDWIG: Yes. There is one point I didn’t include so far in the planning, but it was a sort of wishful thinking from my part. And you raised this question in the chat room, Heidi: “Wolf, I see that the Master Plan stated draft agenda will be completed in April.” Yes, I would like to have it completed by April. What I would like on top of this, I would like to have a General Assembly divided in two parts – not only the formal part where we do the reporting like where we will have votings again. I would also like to have more or less a content-oriented or substance-oriented part of the agenda which is how we can encourage a better participation and inclusion of our members.
And this part of the agenda I would like as soon as we know who will participate. We should start a sort of informal survey, asking participants to Lisbon what their ideas are, what their suggestions are, etc., and to include members who do not regularly participate for their ideas and their preferences. Let’s call this an inclusive approach backed up by the desires, needs, and ideas of the members; and then if we have collected this input then drafting a more or less draft version of the Lisbon agenda by the end of April. Does this answer your question, Heidi?
HEIDI ULLRICH: Yes it does, thank you.
WOLF LUDWIG: Okay. I see Yrjö’s hand raised in the Adobe Connect. Please, Yrjö?
YRJÖ LÄNISPURO: Yeah, it’s Yrjö Länispuro for the transcript record. Just to be sure, when I talk to these ISOC ALSes is it so that one representative for each ALS will be funded to Lisbon? Thank you.
WOLF LUDWIG: Yes, Yrjö, to directly respond to you this was the case so far for the previous face-to-face General Assemblies we had in June, 2008 in Paris and in March, 2009 in Mexico City. There was one representative per ALS who was fully funded.
YRJÖ LÄNISPURO: Thank you.
WOLF LUDWIG: It was not exclusive: if a second representative wanted to come and having a sponsor or any travel support from another source of course is highly welcome. We had this case in Belgrade where we couldn’t fund anybody and we had one or two ALSes with two representatives. Of course, after that the participation is open. Any further comments? Any further questions?
Okay, I take this as an all-over consent and final approval from your side. And I’m really pleased that we can more or less conclude this first step of the planning procedure. Planning is always the easier part of the work; implementation of a planning creates much more work. And as we said before, it needs support from all of you. And if you have any further ideas on this please communicate it via the EURALO list or directly by individual mails, etc. And this is just a first brainstorming and there is still a lot that can be added to this planning.
Anything else to be added? If no questions, this is my last call for questions on this agenda item now or comments… If this is not the case I will continue with our last agenda item, which is #7 – Any Other Business. Any one of you have… Let me, if this is not the case let me just add one more point.
Somehow in conjunction with the General Assembly planning, but what is EuroDIG 2013 itself, I don’t know who is subscribed to the EuroDIG info letter. We had the last info letter yesterday with the last call for proposals, and all of you are invited and all of you are reminded that the call for proposals for EuroDIG 2013 closes at the end of this month – on the 31st of December. This year there is no prolongation foreseen and if you have any ideas, any topic or issue you think should be considered for the EuroDIG program then you are welcome to go to the website. And there’s a special section with a template where you can submit your proposal.
We are not asking for proposals for sessions at this moment, not for plenaries, not for workshops – just for topics. So if you think one aspect, one topic should be particularly considered on the European agenda next year please let us know and please submit your proposal in the next ten to 14 days.
Anything else? No more questions, no more comments? Okay, then we are through with our last monthly call of the year. Let me take the opportunity to thank all of you for your active contributions and for your regular participation at our monthly calls. For me it’s always a pleasure to have you on the call, and at this time of the year let me take the opportunity to wish all of you some very calm and joyful seasonal holidays.
Thanks a lot everybody, and I hope to hear and see you again at the beginning of next year. Bye-bye everybody.
[End of Transcript]
