• Deyan Ginev,
  • Frédéric Wang,
  • Michael Kohlhase,
  • Moritz Schubotz,
  • Raniere Silva.

Session Chair: Frédéric Wang.

Minutes Scribe: Deyan.



  1. Michael, Moritz and Deyan met at CICM 15.
  2. There is broad board consensus on the MathML association’s purpose in 2 directions:
    • Promoting MathML
    • Funding MathML projects
  3. There is still a lot of administrative work that needs to be done before we move forward.


  1. Vote on accepting the MathML Manifesto
    • Unanimously accepted (5 yes, 0 no, 0 abstained)
  2. Vote on selecting a MathML Association logo
    • After a discussion of alternatives, suggestion 5.g) had broadest appeal
    • Multiple-choice vote on alternatives had unanimous support for suggestion 5.g) (5 yes, 0 no, 0 abstained)
    • Congratulations on the new official MathML Association logo and thanks to all parties which contributed suggestions!
  3. Amendment of MathML Association bylaws
    • Affiliate status should not be required for director election - unanimous approval (5 yes, 0 no, 0 abstained)
    • Board meeting minutes automatically become public 1 week after the meeting - accepted with simple majority (3 yes, 0 no, 2 abstained)
  4. Vote on Affiliates structure and guidelines - unanimously accepted (5 yes, 0 no, 0 abstained)

Deferred Items and Next Steps

  1. Selection of a MathML Association “slogan”
  2. Directors interested in “communication” will work on making the website public, Raniere leads the effort
  3. Directors interested in “funding” will work on a tax-exemption application to the IRS
  4. Election of Board Officers in the next meeting
  5. Revisit Affiliates document to clarify tax-exemption language
  6. Start contacting potential affiliates
  7. Moritz will organize a Doodle for the next meeting, for the second half of September

Full meeting log

[23:01] <fredw> deyan: physikerwelt____ raniere kohlhase: Welcome to our second MathML board meeting!

[23:01] <fredw> The agenda for this meeting is available on the MathML Wiki:

[23:01] <fredw>—Announcement

[23:01] <fredw> So basically after the CICM meeting, I think everybody now agree with the two goals: 1) promoting MathML and 2) funding MathML projects. For both of them we still need to make progress on our public image & on the paperwork…

[23:01] <fredw> So today we will first start with the pending votes and then discuss the next steps…

[23:01] <fredw> Does that sound good?

[23:02] <raniere> yes

[23:02] <physikerwelt____> +1

[23:02] <deyan> I second that

[23:02] <kohlhase> +1

[23:03] <fredw> OK, so the first item is “Vote for the MathML Manifesto”

[23:03] <fredw> The latest version published on the Website is Michael’s one:

[23:03] <fredw> I’ve done minor corrections some days ago:

[23:04] <kohlhase> I propose we accept the manifesto in the corrected form.

[23:04] <deyan> minor note: formulas and formulae are both valid spellings, as long as they are used consistently

[23:04] <fredw> deyan: yes, the “correction” was to make things consistent

[23:05] <raniere> second the merge of corrections

[23:05] <physikerwelt____> I vote yes for revision

[23:05] <fredw> OK so let’s start with the vote.

[23:05] <raniere> +1

[23:05] <deyan> +1 in favour

[23:05] <kohlhase> +1

[23:05] <physikerwelt____> *1

[23:05] <physikerwelt____> *1

[23:05] <fredw> +1 in favor

[23:05] <physikerwelt____> +1

[23:06] <fredw> OK, so the manifesto is approved. (Raniere will need to update the Website)

[23:06] <kohlhase> great!

[23:06] <deyan> second minor point: do we have a minute taker for this week, or are the IRC logs the official minutes?

[23:07] <fredw> deyan: good question. I think someone should take the minute.

[23:07] <physikerwelt____> I learned that there are no irc logs

[23:07] <fredw> But we didn’t decide about the Secretary yet

[23:07] <raniere> fredw: I will do it after the meeting.

[23:07] <kohlhase> I think the IRC logs are good as minutes. We should have a results summary though.

[23:07] <physikerwelt____> at least no central

[23:08] <kohlhase> the results summary should mainly cover the votes passed with the numbers.

[23:08] <fredw> I think Deyan’s summary was easier to read

[23:08] <deyan> I volunteer to write the summary and attach the IRC log as an appendix to it.

[23:08] <physikerwelt____> wikimedia operations use a logbot that logs only messages prefixed with log: I think that would be ideal

[23:08] <raniere> I’m logging the meeting on my machine and can archive it somewhere if needed

[23:08] <kohlhase> very good.

[23:08] <deyan> I will upload it within 24 hours of finishing the meeting

[23:08] <physikerwelt____> thanks deyan

[23:08] <kohlhase> yes, thanks.

[23:08] <fredw> thanks. So deyan and/or raniere you’ll take care of that

[23:09] <fredw> So the second item was the “MathML logo”, for which we have had a very long discussion :-)

[23:09] <kohlhase> I propose that we accept 5e as the logo

[23:10] <fredw> So 5e) is the one we currently use

[23:10] <physikerwelt____> fredw: the background is transparent?

[23:10] <fredw> Personally, I’d pref 5f) or 5g) with the “math italic” as suggested by Michael, but I’m fine with 5e)

[23:11] <fredw> physikerwelt____: yes, it is in the SVG

[23:11] <raniere> I prefer 5f or 5g

[23:11] <fredw> I think this one is just a screenshot with the Gnome image previewer

[23:11] <kohlhase> I am also fine with 5g

[23:11] <deyan> Would the board members be open to considering different formats of the same logo as “official alternatives”? I.e. SVG, PNG, PDF, EPS versions of the same image would all be considered official logos.

[23:12] <raniere> 5g > 5e > 5f

[23:12] <kohlhase> deyan?

[23:12] <kohlhase> Moritz?

[23:13] <kohlhase> I think we should only agree on the “shape” of the logo, not the format.

[23:13] <physikerwelt____> I like 5e best but 5?x is fine with me

[23:13] <deyan> I would vote for 5g) , together with my remark on format alternatives all being official (if we need them)

[23:13] <fredw> deyan: why do we need PDF / EPS?

[23:14] <kohlhase> hmmm, seems a slight majority for 5g

[23:14] <fredw> I think the official is SVG since it is the source (although the exact font-family should be given)

[23:14] <physikerwelt____> I’m perfectly fine with 5g

[23:14] <raniere> I have no problem with provide SVG, PNG, PDF and EPS version since sometimes people will need it

[23:15] <deyan> fredw: pockets of publishing would require an EPS file instead of an SVG file. Hopefully we never need to think about this, I just wanted to clarify it in theory.

[23:15] <physikerwelt____> who is not for 5g?

[23:15] <fredw> deyan: OK. I think Michael’s remark is correct (that we agree on the shape) and we can convert it in any format

[23:16] <fredw> So let’s summarize the vote again:

[23:16] <kohlhase> I do not think we have a vote yet.

[23:16] <fredw> me: 5g)

[23:16] <kohlhase> this was open discussion.

[23:17] <raniere> second 5g for the logo. Can we vote?

[23:17] <kohlhase> yes.

[23:17] <physikerwelt____> before we vote we should list the voting options

[23:17] <physikerwelt____> I would propose a single vote on 5g with only yes or no

[23:17] <kohlhase> yes.

[23:17] <kohlhase> seconded

[23:18] <fredw> So to summarize: we vote for the shape of the logo (based on the SVG source) but other formats that can be converted from the source and preserve the shape are valid.

[23:18] <raniere> +1

[23:18] <deyan> I also second this phrasing of the vote

[23:18] <physikerwelt____> +1

[23:18] <kohlhase> +1

[23:18] <deyan> +1 (vote in favour)

[23:19] <physikerwelt____> +1 (vote in favour)

[23:19] <kohlhase> OK, I guess then we can vote for the actual logo.

[23:19] <kohlhase> I propose to accept 5g as the logo

[23:19] <physikerwelt____> yes for 5g

[23:19] <fredw> So let’s start the vote. Please choose one among—Announcement

[23:19] <fredw> me: 5g)

[23:19] <raniere> 5g

[23:20] <kohlhase> 5g

[23:20] <deyan> 5g) as well (a little chaotic, but it seems we are unanimous )

[23:20] <kohlhase> excellent

[23:20] <fredw> physikerwelt____: ?

[23:21] <physikerwelt____> yes for 5g

[23:21] <fredw> OK, so 5g) is accepted

[23:21] <deyan> congratulations on our official logo !

[23:21] <deyan> we have a face :)

[23:22] <fredw> Just to clarify what I used in the SVG source => font-family: sans for the MathML Association text and font-family: Latin Modern Math for the W’s

[23:22] <physikerwelt____> great thanks to all of your for the contious effort to create a nice logo

[23:22] <deyan> and I want to take this opportunity to thank everyone, including non-board affiliates such as Andrea and Bruce, for their discussions and mockup contributions to the logo brainstorming!

[23:23] <fredw> So actually in the same item, there was the creation of a slogan. But I think I was the only one who proposed one.

[23:23] <fredw> “The MathML Association, a math group acting on the Web”

[23:23] <kohlhase> I will pass the thanks on to Andrea

[23:23] <raniere> I’m OK with that slogan

[23:23] <fredw> If you prefer we can postpone the vote for later, as this has not really been discussed before

[23:23] <kohlhase> I do not really like the slogan.

[23:24] <kohlhase> we should think more about this.

[23:24] <fredw> kohlhase: OK, that’s fine.

[23:24] <deyan> I suggest postponing the vote and having an additional round of github discussion.

[23:24] <physikerwelt____> ok letst postpone the slogan decision

[23:24] <deyan> i.e. second kohlhase

[23:24] <kohlhase> It is not very memorable.

[23:24] <physikerwelt____> ^^

[23:24] <deyan> fredw: still puntastic though ;)

[23:25] <physikerwelt____> Do we have a bug for the slogan?

[23:25] <fredw> So let’s move to the next item

[23:25] <kohlhase> How about something simple like “MathML advocacy and development”

[23:25] <kohlhase> just for the record

[23:26] <deyan> second fredw to move to the next vote item. Let’s tackle the slogan on GitHub

[23:26] <kohlhase> +1

[23:26] <fredw> So the second items were the votes for amendment of the bylaws

[23:26] <fredw> next item

[23:27] <fredw> but I reverted the commits

[23:27] <fredw> So for the first one:

[23:27] <fredw> I’m not sure I understand “In order to be eligible to serve as a director on the board of directors, the individual must be 18 years of age and an affiliate within affiliate classifications created by the board of directors.”

[23:27] <fredw> this was in the original model of bylaws

[23:28] <fredw> I believe directors don’t need to be “affiliates”

[23:28] <physikerwelt____> so we vote on

[23:28] <physikerwelt____> so we vote on ?

[23:28] <fredw> physikerwelt____: yes

[23:28] <physikerwelt____> is there a need for discussion?

[23:28] <kohlhase> no

[23:28] <fredw> deyan: raniere ?

[23:29] <deyan> I am ready to vote

[23:29] <deyan> … and raniere already merged them :)

[23:29] <raniere> yes

[23:29] <raniere> we can vote!

[23:29] <physikerwelt____> ok so let’s start the vote

[23:29] <fredw> So let’s vote

[23:29] <kohlhase> I propose to accept the change

[23:29] <physikerwelt____> +1

[23:29] <kohlhase> +1

[23:29] <deyan> +1

[23:29] <fredw> me: I accept the change

[23:29] <raniere> +1

[23:30] <fredw> So the vote is accepted.

[23:30] <kohlhase> unanimously

[23:30] <fredw> raniere: you will be able to merge that one :-)

[23:30] <fredw> The second was more controversial

[23:30] <raniere> LOL

[23:30] <physikerwelt____> should we agree on a voting sing?

[23:30] <fredw> I don’t remember where was the discussion

[23:31] <fredw> but basically Moritz had concerned about making the minutes public immediately

[23:31] <fredw> and Deyan noticed that anyway we want the board meeting to be public (and I agree with that)

[23:31] <kohlhase> I like to have an upper limit for publishing the mintues.

[23:31] <physikerwelt____> I just wanted to have clear rules

[23:32] <physikerwelt____> I’m for

[23:32] <kohlhase> do we need discussion?

[23:32] <physikerwelt____> no that was the wrong commit

[23:32] <physikerwelt____> I mean the opposite

[23:32] <kohlhase>

[23:33] <physikerwelt____> thanks

[23:33] <physikerwelt____> I have no need for discussion

[23:33] <kohlhase> do we need discussion?

[23:33] <deyan> it’s a bit imprecise, but I think the common sense workflow will “just work”. I can vote for that commit

[23:33] <fredw> So to be clear we change the wording “once accepted by the board” to “one week after the meeting”

[23:34] <kohlhase> yes.

[23:34] <physikerwelt____> yes

[23:34] <physikerwelt____> technically I like the logbot approach used by wikimedia but that’s offtopic here

[23:34] <deyan> I motion to start a vote

[23:35] <physikerwelt____> for example “ !log deployed parsoid version d5a5722c Logged the message at, Master"

[23:35] <kohlhase> seconded

[23:35] <physikerwelt____> +1

[23:35] <raniere> +1

[23:35] <kohlhase> +1 for accepting the change

[23:35] <physikerwelt____> +1 for accepting the change

[23:35] <deyan> +1 for accepting the change

[23:36] <kohlhase> fred?

[23:36] <fredw> +0 (I do not pronounce on this)

[23:36] <deyan> raniere: ?

[23:36] <raniere> +0

[23:36] <kohlhase> OK, then the motion is carried

[23:36] <fredw> So the commit is accepted

[23:36] <deyan> 3 in favor, 2 abstained, the motion passes

[23:37] <kohlhase> BTW, the logbot approach is a valid implementation.

[23:37] <kohlhase> but summary + log is as well.

[23:37] <deyan> the IRS will be happier to see executive summaries, than IRC logs

[23:38] <physikerwelt____> just to familarize ourselfs with the bylaws would a 2 in favor vote still be accepted

[23:38] <fredw> So finally: “Decide the next steps”

[23:38] <physikerwelt____> or do we need to have 50% at least

[23:38] <deyan> 2 in favour, 3 abstained is a successful vote I believe

[23:39] <fredw> I think so

[23:39] * raniere agrees with “2 in favour, 3 abstained is a successful vote I believe”

[23:39] <deyan> you need majority favour in all cast ballots, and you need quorum when the vote starts

[23:39] <kohlhase> we have both.

[23:39] <deyan> yes, just clarifying

[23:39] <fredw> (For 5 abstained, I’m not sure what happens…)

[23:40] <deyan> 5 abstained should postpone the vote to the next meeting ^^

[23:40] <kohlhase> not the majority, but a tie.

[23:40] <fredw> OK, so can we move to the next item

[23:40] <fredw> “Decide the next steps”

[23:41] <physikerwelt____> yes… however I think this should be a discussion

[23:41] <deyan> have we concluded all immediate voting items?

[23:41] <raniere> fredw: the Web site need changes?

[23:41] <fredw> yes, all the scheduled votes are done

[23:41] <fredw> so the last item (from the wiki) is just a discussion

[23:41] <deyan> good job to finishing all of that in 40 mins

[23:42] <fredw> (good that we skip the slogan discussion :-))

[23:42] <deyan> so, I think Michael had a great timeframe proposed

[23:42] <deyan> we start with making the website public

[23:42] <kohlhase> Don’t we need to vote on these three being the next steps to work on?

[23:43] <deyan> than whoever wants to do social media campaigning should track our Twitter account and tweet out reasonably

[23:43] <fredw> Basically I think people have more or less expressed their personal priorities.

[23:43] <kohlhase> I think we need to at least decide to move the website from dev to main.

[23:43] <kohlhase> And do that.

[23:43] <deyan> +1 on voting, +1 agreeing we should

[23:44] <kohlhase> I also think that we are ready to adopt the affiliates document.

[23:44] <kohlhase> that needs to go onto the web site.

[23:44] <fredw> deyan: I think you had concerns about having a “beautiful” website

[23:44] <physikerwelt____> +0 on voting, +1 on publishing the website

[23:44] <raniere> I will take some time on the weekend to check the website

[23:45] <raniere> And I can publish it on Monday morning

[23:45] <kohlhase> very good.

[23:45] <fredw> Should we postpone the affiliates to the next meeting (as this was not announced on the agenda)

[23:45] <deyan> fredw: yes, I but I am also pragmatic. And I have personally failed to improve the site in the allotted time, so I’d rather have a great site rather than the Perfect site

[23:45] <physikerwelt____> raniere: that would be awesome

[23:45] <fredw> deyan: ok

[23:45] <fredw> I think the main problems for the website were: 1) automatically generate from the source 2) make it work on mobile

[23:45] <fredw> raniere: can you say something about the status?

[23:46] <fredw> oh, and also kohlhase mentioned changing the colors to match the logo

[23:46] <kohlhase> good idea :-).

[23:46] <raniere> fredw: I have to setup a script to automatically generate from the source after each commit/merge

[23:47] <raniere> but I can keep doing it manually for the next few months

[23:47] <raniere> I don’t remember the problem on mobile

[23:47] <fredw> raniere: is there a technical issue? Or just that you haven’t had time so far

[23:47] <fredw> raniere: I think you mentioned something about the rendering not being good on mobile

[23:48] <raniere> fredw: I didn’t have time to play with web hooks and GGI

[23:48] <raniere> s/GGI/CGI

[23:48] <fredw> OK

[23:48] <fredw> So basically, I let people interested in “communication” manage the website and so on.

[23:48] <kohlhase> Can we reach a decision about the affiliates?

[23:48] <fredw> Personally, I’d like to help with the paperwork & affiliates

[23:49] <kohlhase> It is mentioned under “next steps”.

[23:49] <deyan> fredw: good plan. I would like to help with communication and NYC-local work (IRS …)

[23:49] <fredw> So the affiliates:

[23:49] <fredw> I think everybody should re-read this

[23:50] <fredw> and we can vote for it in the next meeting.

[23:50] <fredw> At least that’s what I propose

[23:50] <kohlhase> OK

[23:50] <physikerwelt____> I’m happy with the newly introduced categories for the sponsors

[23:50] <kohlhase> this means that we cannot start getting them.

[23:50] <kohlhase> s/getting/recruiting/

[23:50] <fredw> kohlhase: Also, there is a question about whether we want to keep a separate document (like the conflict of interest policy) or integrate it into our bylaws

[23:51] <kohlhase> I would not make it part of the bylaws.

[23:51] <fredw> kohlhase: we can also do a board meeting in september

[23:51] <kohlhase> maybe the categories alone have to become part of the bylaws.

[23:51] <physikerwelt____> I think the sponsoring issue also depends on the IRS issue?

[23:52] <deyan> I would suggest the next board meeting is no sooner than 6 weeks from today

[23:52] <fredw> physikerwelt____: not necessarily, that would help for companies to have the IRS

[23:52] <fredw> and for american citizens too

[23:52] <fredw> but people can donate as long as we have a bank / paypal account

[23:52] <deyan> btw, ideally we have all our internal documents finalized before we file to the IRS. We need to print+attach all of them for the tax-exemption application

[23:53] <fredw> deyan: ok, so the affiliates doc should be done before

[23:53] <deyan> I will consult with PlanetMath about these details again, hopefully Aaron can give me a couple of free lawyer hours

[23:53] <fredw> deyan: I was suggesting doing a short meeting in september, just to vote for the affiliates doc

[23:53] <physikerwelt____> deyan if that’s the case I’d propose to accept the as it is

[23:54] <kohlhase> I second that .

[23:54] <kohlhase> and then we can still amend it in September.

[23:54] <fredw> ok, that sounds good

[23:54] <fredw> so at least we can publish the doc on the website

[23:54] <deyan> I’m a bit worried whether one part violates tax-exemption

[23:54] <physikerwelt____> do we need to vote on that

[23:55] <deyan> “ Affiliates may benefit from transaction or arrangement with the MathML Association. “

[23:55] <kohlhase> yes we should

[23:55] <fredw> deyan: can you elaborate on that?

[23:55] <deyan> this needs be constrained within the ideal mission of the NGO

[23:55] <deyan> we should never exclusively serve private interest, that violates our tax-exempt status

[23:55] <fredw> deyan: I think there is one part that mentions that

[23:56] <deyan> there is a mention of conflicts of interest, but that is different

[23:56] <fredw> ok

[23:56] <fredw> so maybe this should be clarified

[23:56] <deyan> however, I agree we should start recruiting affiliates asap

[23:56] <physikerwelt____> if we need to amand the document we can do that in a circular resolution

[23:56] <kohlhase> we can accept the affiliates document today –> recruiting

[23:57] <kohlhase> and then amend it as necessary to clarify conflicts and tax.

[23:57] <deyan> so maybe we can start tentative recruiting (warm-up calls) and we vote in 6 weeks on amending the document AND adding new affiliates

[23:57] <deyan> I believe we need to vote new affiliates in, correct?

[23:57] <kohlhase> correct

[23:57] <fredw> yes

[23:57] <kohlhase> (if we accept the doc)

[23:58] <deyan> I am happy with the current document, modulo amendments that protect tax-exemption

[23:58] <physikerwelt____> I would like to vote on the doc

[23:58] <fredw> raniere: ?

[23:58] <raniere> I’m OK

[23:58] <kohlhase> OK as well

[23:58] <raniere> we can vote on the doc

[23:59] <fredw> OK so let’s start the vote

[23:59] <fredw> me: +1

[23:59] <physikerwelt____> We vote on small fixes to affilliates text.

[23:59] <physikerwelt____> +1

[00:00] <raniere> +1

[00:00] <kohlhase> +1

[00:00] <deyan> +1

[00:01] <fredw> OK so the doc is approved

[00:01] <physikerwelt____> are there further things we need to vote on?

[00:01] <fredw> I’d just like to come back to the manifesto one second. The mention “Warning: this is a draft.” should be removed.

[00:01] <raniere> +1

[00:01] <kohlhase> obviously

[00:01] <deyan> fredw: this is probably too obvious for a vote :) +1

[00:01] <physikerwelt____> +1

[00:02] <fredw> yes, but just wanted to be clarify

[00:02] <fredw> as we didn’t mention that during the vote

[00:02] <fredw> +1

[00:02] <deyan> ok, I think we are ready to wrap up for today

[00:02] <kohlhase> Seems like we have covered all the agenda.

[00:02] <physikerwelt____> in the german law this is called “ Berichtigung einer offensichtlichen Unrichtigkeit “

[00:02] <deyan> I would suggest we elect the official positions for our next meeting, we also need those set before we file the IRS forms

[00:03] <kohlhase> which are they?

[00:03] <fredw> deyan: ok that sounds good

[00:03] <fredw> I think we didn’t really discuss that

[00:03] <deyan> President, Vice-president, Secretary, Treasurer

[00:03] <kohlhase> that leaves one member-at-large.

[00:04] <kohlhase> this is a good idea.

[00:04] <kohlhase> nominations?

[00:04] <deyan> yes, they are separate from the Board Directors. I am hoping the director without a position will be doing most of the actual work ;)

[00:05] <kohlhase> Let’s initially elect them from the board.

[00:06] <physikerwelt____> kohlhase: today?

[00:07] <kohlhase> that is what I understand deyan proposed.

[00:08] <deyan> oh, my suggestion was for the next meeting

[00:08] <deyan> we ran over 1 hour today, so I am personally ready to wrap up

[00:08] <deyan> but if there is overwhelming desire to keep going, I’ll manage

[00:08] <kohlhase> OK, then I misunderstood “for the next meeting” as “so we have them in the next meeting”

[00:08] <fredw> I think that’s fine to discuss that on github and move this item to the next meeting

[00:09] <kohlhase> seconded

[00:09] <fredw> (so again I’m proposing doing the next meeting in september)

[00:09] <physikerwelt____> +2 for the next meeting

[00:09] <kohlhase> I would propose after september 15.

[00:09] <physikerwelt____> let’s limit the next meeting time to 60 min

[00:09] <deyan> I would suggest September 18 or later

[00:09] <physikerwelt____> for me everything after sep 13 is fine

[00:10] <fredw> I’m fine with any date in september

[00:10] <fredw> Summary:

[00:10] <fredw> - Raniere will take care of publishing documents & updating the website

[00:10] <fredw> - discussion about the slogan

[00:10] <fredw> - check again about the affiliates doc (with respect to tax-exemptions form)

[00:10] <fredw> - start contacting affiliates

[00:10] <fredw> - Deyan & Fred will check the tax-exemptions form

[00:10] <fredw> - Talk about officer and elect them in the next meeting

[00:10] <raniere> I’m fine with any date in september

[00:10] <physikerwelt____> Let’s do a doodle for sept 15+

[00:10] <fredw> anything else?

[00:10] <deyan> physikerwelt____: are you volunteering to make the doodle? :)

[00:10] <kohlhase> nothing else

[00:11] <deyan> I think we can close a very productive meeting!

[00:11] <physikerwelt____> deyan: I already started

[00:11] <fredw> yes, thank you everybody

[00:11] <deyan> physikerwelt____: wonderful

[00:11] <raniere> this was a good meeting

[00:11] <kohlhase> bye bye, good meeting.

[00:11] <raniere> fredw: thanks very much for leading this