Colleagues, Having described the changes I propose to make in how, and on what subjects, the RALO contributes to the advice available to the Board, and the changes I propose to make in travel support allocation for the purpose of improving on the rather limited record of enabling informed contribution to policy making by individuals, I now want to direct your thoughts to the RALO's call time management. The RALO has monthly calls of 60 to 90 minutes duration. The bulk of the time is given over to casual, or careless, oral summaries which could be less momentary, more memorable, and more actionable, when written, and when written, distributed several days prior to the call for which time is scheduled, and allow for questions on points unclear from the readers and informed discussion, opportunities now lost to "recitations". The net is that RALO calls are wicked boring and unlikely to attract new interest outside of an asylum, and of course, the eminently sane who do in fact listen to each call, live or in mp3 form. This is a situation which can be improved. There is the minor discipline of call time management, which the incumbent manages passably, but the larger issue is what information, from whom, and intended for what audiences, form the non-procedural content of our calls? I propose to change RALO call time, which is likely to deflect any interested person or organization listening for the first time to something, anything else, to something that sells the idea that the RALO is what the 2007 MOU envisioned -- the place where the interests of individuals is expressed and informs network policy in the large. So rather than having the usual recitations from the usual reciters, who may be challenged by the sheer repetition and lack of apparent utility of monthly recitations, I propose that a portion of the call time be given over to expert presentations on network policy issues, which are then "canned" as podcasts and used to effect both "inreach" and inform those not on the calls, and "outreach", to expand awareness of the RALO as an agent of change. What I have in mind for speaker and content are the following: o Michael Geist on marks or surveillance in Canada, o Larry Lessig on the topic of his choice, o Mark Rotenberg on surveillance in the US, ... In brief, more of the process done via mail, all of the status updates in writing and several days before an agenda slot, and content that informs us, and anyone else not yet residing in an asylum for the procedurally deranged. Again, these are proposals for change, contingent upon election. Eric Brunner-Williams Eugene, Oregon