Wolf:
I don't want to bore anybody with certain repetitions but this Board was/is a new group with a majority of people not even knowing each other and far more heterogeneous than other comparable groups (old hands and newbies, backgrounds, cultures etc.) Therefore you cannot just prescribe or impose a dynamic and working method which is not considered as "enabling, encouraging and useful" by the majority of this group. What sounds quite pragmatic turned out to be wishful thinking.
You know better than me the current reality of ALAC. I just gave you my opinion, which is likely to be a perception that others share from the outside. Then, the decision on what to do is only ALAC's. And we all will respect it.
(...)
I agree again, as a European I consider privacy concerns as among the most relevant. But let me be frank: if I could find a sponsor to invest more of my time and capacities into this work - without being obliged to earn some money in between with my professional activities - I would just do it. For the time being, it takes already a considerable portion of my "free time" to follow some organisational necessities. It's the contrast again between the wishful and the necessary or nice-to-have and musts ;-).
I understand this. I am a volounteer as well.
In summary, I would see a great value in EURALO discussing policy matters, and although a f2f meeting could help, maybe the best thing is to start now, in order to get the maximum benefit when people will meet in person in Paris. But it would be a big mistake to wait another two months for the f2f meeting in order to start discussing substantive issues.
I don't consider this as a recommendation directed personally to me only but to all of us and would appreciate the same.
Absolutely, it is a recommendation directed to all of us. Even the Board has sometimes the temptation to postpone substantial issues and discuss organizational matters. Again, it might be just my own taste/preference, but since that's my feeling, I communicate it. Cheers, Roberto