Colleagues, During the last hour of today's call there was discussion of the subject of experts, and the lack of an expert in international law identified as a deficit. In the chat a concern was expressed, not for the first time, that an expert in California non-profit law was also needed. I share the view that expert advice on issues relating to converting the Corporation from "no members" to "members", and similar questions, is a pressing need, if this, or any similar question, is to be undertaken by this, or a similar Working Group, e.g., the CWG. That I don't think the membership form feasible is another matter, and my experience in the original Membership Implementation Task Force is just that -- we didn't succeed and we didn't try everything and what we got (eventually) was "At Large" as an Advisory Committee. What I don't share is the view that the advice _must_ come from a source other than the Corporation's legal staff. The Corporation's legal staff have the subject matter expertise -- California's incorporation language and case law, and are bound by the ethics and professional responsibilities requirements of the California Bar Association. If the "member" question is worth considering, and if time is pressing, as we lack a basis to know that the Corporation's legal staff does not have subject matter expertise, nor does Corporation legal staff have an identified conflict of interest with ... an activity or activities it has called into existence -- the CCWG and/or CWG, no an ethics violation, why are we deferring the "member" and similar questions at all? It is one thing for scenarios submitted to the WS4 stream to have (many) hypotheticals of incompetence, conflict or malfeasance, it is quite another to conduct ourselves as if the hypothetical is a fact pattern in the present. The Corporation's legal staff are already paid, a defect that apparently makes finding sources of International Law expertise challenging, and from JJ to Dan to Sam to ... known to many of us, and known for many years. Absent very clear statements to the contrary, we should be able to proceed and determin whether the "member" suggestion has sufficient value to be worth implementation consideration. Eric Brunner-Williams Eugene, Oregon