►
From YouTube: 2020-10-29 Governance Committee private meeting
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
B
D
Do
I
have
the
the
correct
document,
it
looks
like
the
meeting
notes
for
this
week.
Aren't
in
here
yet
or
is
it
just
no
agenda
yet
the
latter.
B
And
not
for
you
as
well,
just
so
you
know
all
those
meetings
being
recorded,
so
you
are
currently
being
recorded.
This
is
what
you
requested.
Some.
B
Just
heads
up.
C
G
E
F
C
G
You
use
for,
for,
like
google
docs,
do
you
use
your
amazon
address
or
do
something
else.
F
I
use
my
google
address
and
I
think
my
gmail
is
is
pretty
much
across
the
across
all
the
invites
for
the
cigs
and
stuff.
So
would
you
like
me
to
give
it
to
you
if.
G
F
A
G
Does
anyone
have
any
actual
agenda
today?
You
know
welcome
daniel
and
elita,
obviously,
but
I
think
ted
said
he
was
going
to
miss.
Today
we
got
morgan,
ed.
F
And
I
have
to
drop
momentarily.
Unfortunately,
I
just
had
one
item
that
I
wanted
to
bring
up
just
as
a
heads
up.
I
I
ran
a
scan
on
all
the
code
reapers
for
copyright.
You
know
again
just
copyrights
because
we
were
trying
to
figure
out.
F
You
know
what
copyright
we
should
add,
which
is
obviously
the
open,
telemetry
authors,
copyright
and-
and
I
noticed
that
there
are
some
discrepancies
in
the
that
is
their
different
copyrights
that
obviously
may
have
been
inherited
from
open
census
or
or
open
tracing,
and
then
so
I
will.
I
would
like
to
you
know,
raise
a
pr
just
to
submit
a
markdown
file
for
the
community
repo,
where
everybody
can
actually
every
new
developer
or
new
contributor
can
act,
find
the
copyright.
G
G
F
H
F
Yeah
I
mean
licensing
is
one
thing,
but
because
it's
easier
to
check
right
because
there's
a
license.text
explicitly
but
but
the
copyrights.
Usually,
if
we
I
mean
there
are
two
ways
to
handle
that
right,
as
as
you
guys
might
have
seen
where
you
either
have
it
embedded
in
the
code.
It's
you
know
the
source
file
itself
or
you
can
have
a
common
file
in
the
repo
and
then
everybody
just
links
to
it.
B
Yeah,
I
posted
what
we
currently
have
so
make
sure
to
review
it.
F
F
B
B
You
ben
do
we
need
to
do
some
sort
of
retrospective
of
election
last
time
it
was
helpful
to
like
I
mean
I,
I
remembered
few
items
about
this
election.
We
can
retrospective
from
previous
one
or
we
want
to
do
it
with
like
three
of
us
separately
as
an
election
committee.
G
I'm
happy
to
do
it.
Whenever
I
mean
I
definitely
have
a.
I
took
a
couple
of
notes
internally
at
this
on
my
computer
about
things
I
wanted
to
do
differently
and
then
I
added
a
couple
to
the
a
few
places
in
that
issue,
but
yeah
there's
a
bunch
of
stuff.
It
was
kind
of
painful.
I
would
like
to.
I
hope
that
that
new
thing
that
they're
building
to
replace
cips
is
ready
next
year
I
mean,
is
that
so
much
of
the
so
many
of
the
issues
are
encapsulated
in
that
tool.
G
Sort
of
reason
for
being
like
just
the
transition
to
email
from
github
is
like
really
lossy
in
terms
of
participation
and
cbs,
doesn't
tell
you
who's
participated.
I
expected
that
most
the
registrants
would
vote
and
we
like,
even
in
the
week
between
registration
voting,
we
lost
like
30
of
the
people
or
something
which
is
pretty.
I
G
G
Or
it's
all
just
use
oauth
with
github,
it's
something.
It's
far
far
far
superior.
So
my
only
thing
about
the
retro
on
this
is
like
anything
having
to
do
with
cibs,
I
think
is
based.
I
mean
if
that
thing
is
ready,
we're
using
it
I'll
say
that
for
sure,
because
it's
there's
no
question
that
cbs
is
missing
and
I
just
don't
want
to
like
agonize
over
the
details
of
cibs.
I
think
there's
a
bunch
of
other
things
too.
G
That
were
not
great
and
I'm
happy
to
talk
about
those,
but
I
would
just
maybe
scope
it
to
that,
but
whatever.
G
H
F
Like
yeah
yeah,
I
think
so
I
think
there
were
a
couple
of
issues
I
at
least
heard
back.
One
was
just
folks
not
realizing
that
they
needed
to
register
and
then
so
they
couldn't
find
the
link
and
then,
of
course
they
did
not
understand
the
two-step
process.
Well
enough,
as
as
constance
you,
you
highlighted.
I
That
was
even
me.
I
think
I
was
technically
one
of
the
late
registrants.
If
I
remember
because
even
though
ben
had
told
me
in
like
governor's
meetings
for
two
weeks
like
about
the
two-step
process-
and
I
got
the
emails
I'll
deal
with
this
later
I'll
deal
with
this
later
and
then
finally,
like
oh
yeah
and
that's
even
with
knowing
so
yeah.
A
B
So
do
we
see
any
any
reason
to
increase
the
top
of
a
funnel,
so
we
only
have
like
so
200.
I
don't
remember
the
number,
but
is
there
any
way
to
increase
this
funnel
it's
pretty
decent
and
reasonable.
G
I
think
that
would
be
much
better
if,
if
the
all
of
the
people
running
the
various
sigs,
like
kind
of
like
promoted
the
election
in
the
weeks
leading
up
to
it
and
just
reminded
people
that
it's
happening
as
I
kind
of
felt
bad,
like
spamming
people,
although
I
probably
should
have
in
retrospect
just
be
like
you
know-
and
you
know,
the
feedback
you
gave
daniel
was
also
given
on
github.
That
people
are
like
that
was
too
long.
G
I
And
multiple
times,
people
who
attend
the
meetings-
at
least
many
of
them
were
told
just
because,
like
I,
I
was
dropping
in
along
with
andrew
to
some
of
the
sig
meetings
just
to
give
them
updates
on
the
rc
status
and
some
of
them.
I,
if
no
one
else
mentioned
it.
I
mentioned
there
was
an
election
going
on
and
check
your
email,
but
others
like
the
sig
leaders
had
already
brought
it
up,
but
it
was
already
on
the
agenda.
F
I
A
G
Could
have
been,
we
could
have
done
a
lot
more
or
I
could
have
done
a
lot
more.
I
think
to
improve
the
like
just
the
hit
rate
of
people
literally
understanding
what
they
had
to
do.
I
think
that
there
was
just
confusion
about
what
was
needed
from
a
just
an
activity.
Standpoint,
that's
not
getting
necessary
and
I
think
that's
not
me
really.
So
I
apologize
that
it
wasn't
clear
to
people
or
I
think.
F
G
F
F
G
There's
some
like
missing
infographic
or
something
like
that,
but
I
would
I
would
say
that
this
is
exactly
the
sort
of
thing
that
this
tool
is
supposed
to
fix,
and
that's
here
that's
kind
of
what
I
was
saying
like.
I
think
the
cips
thing
it's
like
when
you
actually
get
down
to
brass
tacks
and
think
about
like
how
to
make
this
work
for
people
like
we've,
had
a
bunch
of
discussions
about
it.
It's
really
hard
to
make
it
like
a
clean
process
without
like
losing
some
of
the
important
properties
of
just
fairness.
G
I
guess
and
making
sure
it's
only
one
vote
per
person
and
and
making
sure
that,
like
there's
often
a
lot
of
ambiguity
about
the
right
email
address
for
faults
and
stuff
like
that,
so
so
cibs
is
like.
I
think,
a
lot
of
the
issues
we're
talking
about
again.
I
consider
a
cfs
product
issue
which
hopefully
can
be
fixed
by
this
new
tool.
G
I
also
think
there
are
other
issues
like
I
think,
we're
very
fortunate
to
have
daniel
and
alita
join
us,
so
to
be
clear,
I'm
not
talking
about
either
of
you
at
all,
but
the
number
of
people
who
actually
applied
to
like
run
was
lower
than
we
expected.
I
think,
last
time
last
year
there
are
more
candidates
than
there
are
this
year.
G
Of
the
community
and
the
velocity
of
the
project
it's
got,
I
mean
I
don't
have
the
exact
numbers,
but
it
has
to
be
like
many
many
orders
like
it's.
Yes,
big
factor
larger,
and
I
think
I
just
anticipated
that
there's
going
to
be
like
15
people
running
or
something
like
that
which
has
its
own
set
of
problems,
but
I
think.
I
G
I
don't
think
that's
quite
true,
but
there
were
a
few
people
who
did
register
early,
but
but
it's
certainly
like
the
there
are
people
who
didn't.
That's
for
sure.
That's
unfortunate.
So
I
think
like
we
need
to
have
the
process
to
kind
of
get
the
word
out
about
running.
It
has
to
happen
at
least
a
month
in
advance
of
the
election
itself
and
and
needs
to
be
like
much
louder
than
it
was
this
time
around.
F
Absolutely
then,
because
I
think
that
you
know
we
can
totally
leverage
other
open
source
projects,
sister
projects,
as
well
as
other
channels
where
we
can
get
the
help,
get
the
word
out.
Definitely.
F
H
That
covet
like
in
terms
of
everything
in
terms
of
development
like
open
source
projects
like
just
like
cfps
for
conference,
everything
is
down,
and
people
just
aren't
adding
more
responsibility
to
your
plate,
and
I
think
that
actually,
like
probably,
will
account
for
a
lot
less
people
participating
in
things
like
we're,
expecting
maybe
400
cfps
for
coupon
at
you.
Maybe.
H
F
You're
right
constance,
it's
significantly
down
because
many
of
our
senior
engineers-
or
you
know
folks
that
I
chat
with
just
you
know
they,
even
if
they
can
find
the
time
to
go
and
listen.
That
would
be
great
and
join
in
yeah.
H
F
Yep
so
which,
which
means
that
you
know,
I
mean
we
should
be
doing
even
more
outreach
in
terms
of
just
reaching
out
to
folks
and
just
asking
people
to
get
involved.
G
Yeah-
and
I
think
we
have
you-
know
some
blog
posts
that
sergey
wrote
maybe
a
year
ago
at
this
point,
but
there's
not
a
lot
that
describes
the
job
responsibilities
of
the
open,
telemetry
governing
committee,
which,
I
would
say
you
know,
are
a
little
bit.
What's
the
word
it's
kind
of
lumpy,
it
depends
on
if
you're
taking
on
a
project
or
not.
But
it's
I
don't
think
it's
like
a
huge
amount
of
work,
necessarily
which
is
relevant
to
people
who
are
concerned
about
just
the
amount
of
time
that
they.
I
H
E
D
Excited
speaking
for
myself-
and
I
I
think
it
may
have
other
people
may
feel
the
same
way-
it's
not
entirely
clear
what
the
governance
committee
even
does
like
on
the
on
the
weekly
sig
meetings.
I
I
doubt
if
I
went
to
my
to
my
sig
and
asked
them.
What
do
you
think
the
governance
meeting
the
governance
committee
did
in
the
last
month?
I
doubt
they
would
be
able
to
tell
you
so
the
idea
of
running
for
something
when
you
have
no
idea
what
the
responsibilities
really
are
is
not
easy
either.
G
The
responsibility
I
mean,
I
think
liz
has
said
in
the
past
that,
like
you,
can
think
of
the
governance
committee
as
like
the
product
team
for
open
telemetry.
I
wish
that
was
the
case.
I
actually
don't
think
it
is
the
case.
Occasionally
we
talk
about
deadlines
and
how
we
need
to
get
to
ga
and
stuff,
but
I
don't
think
the
charter.
That
was
something
I
was
going
to
bring
up
next
week.
Actually,
but
now
that
we
have
you
know
this
crew,
I
would
like
to
actually
get
it
to
be
more
like
that.
G
I
think
it
would
be
helpful
for
the
project
we
I
think,
need
a
little
bit.
We
need
them
a
stronger
like
product
voice,
I
think
in
open
telemetry,
just
in
terms
of
setting
deadlines.
G
Actually,
it's
not
really
about
scope,
but
just
deadlines,
but
I
don't
think
the
role
is
that
clear
and
I
think
now
that
the
project
has
kind
of
stabilized
in
terms
of
a
variety
of
things,
since
we
formed
things
like
even
a
year
ago,
I
would
love
the
I
think,
as
part
of
the
effort
in
november
to
do
kind
of
mission
values,
vision,
type
stuff.
G
I
think
it
would
also
be
high
time
to
like
nail
down
the
charter
for
the
gc
in
like
firmer,
more
concrete
terms,
both
for
other
people's
benefit
and,
frankly,
for
our
benefit
too,
because
it
seems
like
we
talked
about
things
like
you
know
that
are
obviously
that
she
sees
business
like
copyrights
and
licensing
and
stuff
like
that,
as
well
as
occasionally
talk
about
deadlines.
But
I
just
don't
think
it's
that
clear.
F
Yeah,
I
agree,
that's
I
think,
having
an
agenda
and
and
really
going
after.
You
know
a
set
of
areas
that
we'd
like
to
target
at
the
beginning
of
the
year
and
and
then
kind
of
working
towards
that
is
exciting.
So
absolutely
we
have
we
have
so
much.
You
know
that
is
coming
up
with
metrics.
You
know
we're
starting
to
go
rc
and
ga
and
and
logs
starting
to
happen.
So
there's
just
a
lot
of
exciting
components.
I
see
happening
in
the
next
year.
B
F
B
Defining
how
we
operate
with
open,
metrics
or
fluent
beat
that
may
be
something
that
we
have
to
do
as
a
governor's
committee.
F
B
I
have
a
question
about
election
like
actually
two
questions.
First
is
checking
this
last
pr
from
our
leader,
fixing
up
buyer
and
then
like.
We
have
questions
like
whether
these
facts
are
fair
and
I
I'm
curious.
What
like
can
we
formulate
the
like
amount
of
checking
we're
making
on
candidate
buyer?
I
feel
I
don't
feel
it
was.
I
I'm
not
sure
it
was
fair
to
ask
whether
a
lady
suggestion
I
mean
I'm
not
picking
on
you.
B
It's
just
like
you
brought
us
intonation
conversation
that,
like
how
much
checking
on
buyers
should
we
do
that
governance
committee
or
election
committee
going
forward.
G
Yeah,
that's
fair.
I
mean
I'll
address
that
because
I'm
the
one
who
I
wouldn't
call
it
fact
checking
exactly.
I
mean
I
I
it
was.
It
was
like
an
honest
question.
I
guess
I
just
wanted.
I
think
the
word
contribute
is
something
that
can
mean
a
lot
of
different
things
and
I
or-
and
I
just
wanted
to
like
make
sure
I
understood
I
didn't
actually
see
like
a
response
on
that
and
I
just
closed
the
pr
since
the
election
was
over.
G
I
did
actually
read
all
the
bios
and
like
and
and
made
sure
that
either
I
knew
everything
was
basically
like
accurate
or
if
I,
if
I
didn't
in
that
case,
I
just
wanted
to
like
clarify.
Basically,
so
I
think
that's
appropriate,
like
especially
with
words
that
like
have,
in
my
mind,
kind
of
precise
meanings,
but
I'm
happy
to
take
feedback
about
that.
F
Yeah
I
mean
again,
I
could
not.
I
mean
at
least
personally,
I
could
not
figure
out
what
precisely
you
meant
if
I
contribute,
because
I
do
a
lot
of
things
across
the
project,
including
you
know,
development
as
well
as
product
work.
If
you
will
from
you
know
more,
if
you
would
ask
what
the
definition
of
product
is
as
well
as
community
outreach.
So
again,
I
I
think
that
scoping
what
what
we
are
looking
for
would
be
good,
because
I
was
kind
of
torn
between
you
know.
F
What
is
the
amount
of
detail?
Do
you
provide?
You
can
easily
provide
a
lot
more
detail,
so
that
was
just
something
that
at
least
was
ambiguous
for
me,
because
I
you
know.
D
F
Having
worked
on
different,
open
source
projects
again
contribution
usually
is
not
only
code,
it's
documentation,
it's
you
know
again
ensuring
that
we
have
a
quality
of
excellence
and
all
the
components
that
are
being
shipped.
It's
cicd.
It
has
many
many
different
parts.
G
Important
yeah,
that
makes
sense,
I
mean
it
could
be
somewhat
parametric
in
terms
of
the
way
that
the
bios
are
done.
I
think
that
there's
a
lot
of
misplaced
value
on
code
is
the
only
way
to
contribute,
and
I'm
100
about
that.
G
I
would
say
the
bio
that
I
mean
to
take
the
case
and
point
out
like
your
your
bio
as
it
stands,
is
excellent
and
I
think,
reflects
the
sort
of
contributions
that
you've
made
both
to
open,
trace,
open
telemetry
and
to
a
number
of
other
projects
like
from
a
I
think,
a
structural
like
you
know,
governance
goals,
objectives,
kind
of
standpoint,
which
I
think
is
really
important.
So
no
argument
on
that.
G
To
be
clear,
I
think
the
the
point
that
I
think
is
important
and
what
I
was
I
guess
taking
issue
with
is:
is
it
really
read
to
me
like
when
I
read
it?
I
was
like
oh
alita,
like
literally
wrote
the
code
for
a
bunch
of
this
stuff,
and
I
think
that
that
has
a
certain
type
of
like
connotation
for
people.
There's
some
like
sweat,
equity,
that
people
perceive
on
that,
whether
it's
there
or
not-
and
I
just
want
to
be
clear
about
whether
or
not
I
mean.
F
G
Clear,
like
I
haven't
written
a
line
of
code,
nope
inflammatory
since
the
project
was
started
like
and
I
also
haven't,
claimed
to
or
whatever.
But
I
think
like
just
being
clear
about
whether
we're
making
like
direct
technical
contributions
or
whether
we're
managing
people
who
do
that.
Both
are
valid
and.
F
I
think
it
is
different,
then,
at
least
in
my
case,
it's
both
right,
because
I
actually
do
review
and
code
review
and
write
code,
but
what
we
are
doing
is
when
we
are
contributing,
and
there
are
engineers
I'm
working
with
from
from
my
team,
for
example,
we
review
upfront,
we
actually
get.
You
know
a
lot
of
code
reviews
before
we
push
the
final
pr's
and
I
usually
encourage
you
know
engineers
who
were
the
lead
contributors
to
actually
file
the
prs.
F
So
there
is
a
lot
of
nuance
there,
which
is
not
visible
to
the
project,
because
we're
not
really
you
know,
building
out
the
entire
pr
or
the
entire
issue
on
the
project
itself.
There's
a
fair
bit
of
design
work,
design
docs
I
mean
we
have
public
docs,
I'm
happy
to
you
know,
provide
them
in
excruciating
detail
for.
Oh.
G
And
I
think
that
that
explanation
on
its
own
would
have
been
sufficient.
I
would
be
like
cool,
let's
merge,
the
pr
I
think
I
just
wanted.
I
think
like
it
was
a,
as
I
said,
is
a
non-rhetorical
honest
question.
I
think
that's
a
great
answer
in
my
mind,
a
sufficient
answer
so
that
that's
it
really.
I
just.
B
So
I
mean
I
understand
by
your
point
that
once
you
put
it
on
our
website,
it's
kind
of
endorsed
by
us,
so
I
don't
like
we
don't
have
to
like.
We
might
want
to
avoid
this
impression.
So
now
the
question
is
how
much
checking
we
want
to
do
and
what
will
be
satisfying
for
us.
So
I
really
hope
it
wouldn't
be
a
tool
to
eliminate
candidates
or
like
put
by
in
in
like
make
by
look
worse
than
for
other
candidates.
G
Yeah
serious
thing,
so
your
your
point,
sure
guy
is
just
to
make
it
clear
that
that
the
bios
are
in
the
candidate's
own
words
and
that's
that
and
then
there's
no,
it
just
kind
of
just
like
that.
Basically
removes
any
editorial
role
from
the
like
maintainers
of
the
community
repository,
which
is,
I
guess,
the
what
I
was
attempting
to
do
in
that
pr.
B
I
don't
know
I
I
mean
I
can
go
both
directions.
It's
either
works
for
me.
I
just
want
to.
I
mean
you
probably
need
to
have
some
rules
that
would
be
outlined
for
the
next
connections
and
I'm
not
saying
that
what
happened
is
by
the.
Like
I
mean
you,
you
did
always
think
with
with
the
content
that
we
reviewing
it
and
it's
kind
of
endorsed
by
us.
So
we
want
to
make
sure
it's
proven.
G
Yeah,
I
I
mean,
I
guess,
if
we're
suggesting
things
I
would
say
like
next
year,
I
think
the
bio
is,
as
I
said,
I
think
it
should
be
a
little
bit
more
parametric
and
it
should
just
say
you
know.
I
think
it
would
be
fair.
Just
to
say,
like
are
you
doing
this
activity
with
an
open,
telemetry
you're
doing
that
activity
with
an
open
telemetry?
And
I
don't
care
what
the
this
and
that
are.
G
G
Then
and
then
there's
a
bio
section,
that's
that's
unedited
and
I
I
think
that
would
like
leave
latitude
for
people
to
like
be
descriptive
about
their
contributions
to
this
project
or
other
projects,
and
also
just
clarify
like
what
sorts
of
contributions
people
have
been
making
prior
to
running.
B
Yeah,
that's
fair
and
maybe
we
can
ask
sponsors
to
confirm
the
project.
G
F
G
Then
alita
ran
so
she
had
to.
You
know
resign
from
this
video
to
make
sense
sergey
you
stepped
in
and
did
some
work
and
help
on
that
front,
but
to
a
certain
extent
like,
especially
with
that
pr,
I
hate
to
pick
on
it.
Since
you
know
it's
so
specific,
but
it's
just
it's
right.
There
like
it
was
after
the
voting
had
already
started,
and
it
was
over
the
weekend.
So
I'm
like
I
should
do
something
about
this
right
now,
but
it
would
be
much.
F
G
Not
particularly
in
that
particular
case
think
we
have
a
different
solution
which
is
not
to
edit
the
bios,
but,
like
I
I
just
felt
like
I
was
making
at
times
unilateral
decisions,
which
I
don't
actually
really
want
to
be
doing,
especially
in
an
election
context.
So.
G
B
Come
to
this
pr,
I
it
already
was
like
mid
of
election,
so
I
I
mean
I
didn't,
I
feel
like
participation
but
yeah.
It's
fair,
I
mean
yeah.
It
was
too
much
pressure
on
you.
G
F
Yeah,
I
think
then,
a
group
of
of
you
know,
which
is
formally
just
reporting
in
an
election
where
group
would
be
a
good
thing,
because
I
I
know
that
you
got
you,
know
kind
of
the
bulk
of
the
effort
and
drove
it
and
and
that's
kind
of
not
fair
to
you.
Either.
G
G
Some
like
straightforward,
just
like
spreadsheet
type
work
to
do
like
I've
missed
that
kind
of
stuff,
so
that
was
okay,
but
I
just
felt
like
it
wasn't
yeah,
I
think
we're
in
agreement,
but
I
think
this
also
might
mean
that
there's
some
more
rules
that,
like
I,
I
think
it
would
be.
If
you're
going
to
have
multiple
people
come
to
consensus,
it
can't
be
done
in
like
an
hour
or
something
like
that,
so
it
probably
does
also
have
some
ramifications
that
there's
a
rule
like
you
know.
G
F
G
Know,
with
the
benefit
of
the
discussion
with
other
folks
and
and
kind
of
played
it
safe
and
played
a
conservative
as
a
result
which
might
not
have
been
the
right
thing.
So
I
don't
know.
I
I
think
that
we
yeah,
maybe
the
the
the
action
item.
I
guess
for
next
year
is
just
to
be
clear
about
when
things
become
read-only
and
then
there
would
be
fewer
decisions
to
make
on
the
spot,
because
you
can't
make
decisions
on
the
spot
by
committee.
F
Yeah
I
mean
I
definitely
personally
did
not
have
an
understanding
of
you
know
when
when
content
was
frozen
so
well.
G
B
But
bunny,
as
I
pointed
out,
there
will
be
a
lot
of
questionable
decisions
and
it
will
be
great
if
election
committee
will
participate
more.
It's
very
fair
point,
and
I
mean
you
did
so
much
this
election.
I
I
I
think
I
mean
you
you're
almost
trying
single-handedly
so
kudos
to
you.
G
B
One
last
question:
if
we
we're
almost
out
of
time
like
I
was
really,
I
realized
in
the
end
that
we
don't
have
any
continuation
for
election
committee.
Except
I
mean
it
would
be
nice
if
somebody
who
run
election
committee
think
of
running
it
next
year.
So
this
way
it
will
be
at
least
some
continuation,
so
like
like
we
can
the
person
who
run
it
before
can
like
shadow
or
like
a
back
up,
but
then
the
person
who
running
it
may
want
to
do
like
it's
the
same
next
year.
B
So
that
would
be
nice
but
yeah
by
ut.
G
Yeah
I
mean,
I
would
just
say
I
think
sergey
you
and
I
both
are
sort
of
our
seats-
are
expiring
next
year.
So,
if,
if
we're
going
to
run
for
re-election,
we
kind
of
can't
do
it
and
that
basically
means
like
katrina
is
the
only
person
who
I
guess
actually,
maybe
if
you
want
to
do
something,
I'm
happy
to
just
write
down
thoughts
ahead
of
it.
But
I
I
really
shouldn't
be
involved
with
the
election
since
I'll,
probably
presumably
will
run
for
reelection,
but.
F
Yeah
I
mean
again,
I
I
think
when
they're
again
to
sega's
point,
they
should
be
in
the
group
and
and
obviously
continuity
and
and
if
we
can
work
together
on,
you
know,
documenting
the
process
and
making
it
more
and
more
more
completely
transparent,
including
pr
templates
for
whatever
we
need.
You
know,
whatever
information
we
are
collecting
both
from
candidates
and
from
you
know,
registrants
who
are
voting
and
and
any
other
communication.