 Thank you very much. We're going to continue on time I hope so those of you haven't met I'm Prue Mitchell from Wikimedia Australia. I'm really thrilled to get the privilege to introduce to you our next two speakers who are working on a project with Wikimedia Australia on our behalf so it's fantastic that they've agreed to come and share that for the first time with our community commissioning people as well as with the larger group for Worlds of Wikimedia. So very quickly because they're going to tell you more about themselves but Kirsten Thorpe is from the Jumbuna Institute at the University of Technology Sydney which is where we'll all be going this evening so you can talk to her ask her about that and Nathan Santens who is currently at the Powerhouse Museum if any of you have been able to explore and find a really great place to museum in Sydney he'll talk he can fill you in on that as well but they're going to talk to us about First Nations knowledge protocols for description and access which is a very important topic to all of us and with a particular Australian slant today so I'll leave you to do more thank you very much thank you you're among Nindugi Nathan Stens you and Nadia we're at you give a ballado in the Malajah Gadigal Norambangu in the Malajah Gadigal Muji Gangu in the Malajah Nadia Muji Gangu before we begin I'd like to acknowledge that we are on the unseated land of the Gadigal people and pay my respects their elders past and present and recognize that in the space of talking about you know history of storytelling that history here has been since time and memorial and the custodians of that history and these lands are the Gadigal people always was and always will be Aboriginal land so thanks for having us here for the conference as Prue mentioned Nathan and I are going to talk about their work that we're doing with Wikimedia Australia I'm a little bit under the weather but want to let people know that I have taken a PCR test and I'm not COVID positive just in case I start coughing a little but we're thrilled to be here to present our work really interested to have conversations with you all and yeah thankful for the opportunity to connect with your network we're going to talk a little bit first Nathan and I when we present together we like to say that it is relaxed we like to also use yarning as an approach in our work so we're going to share our conversation with you today as we go through the slides and I think we might introduce ourselves first and sort of talk about how we came to this work and what our interests are yeah so I'm Nathan Muji sense I'm a writer man my family is traditionally from Margie New South Wales but I grew up on Dark and Young Country on the New South Wales Central Coast and sort of have I guess communal responsibilities to the community off the Central Coast and I think yeah I love introducing myself because I think it's a great way for it's sort of like in an Aboriginal relational way of you to understand me so you can understand the background of why I think why I think and how I've come to know what I know and I think that's an important thing of like I guess because I work I primarily work in libraries archives and museums formula library and now work at the powerhouse museum and I think in that space there's a lot of trying to pretend as if the knowledge in these spaces exists within a vacuum all the way we tell things exist in a vacuum as you can see my shirt museums are not new I've never been neutral and not neutral but I think you know I guess you know working in these spaces want and even beforehand I think growing up you know you know the things that Aboriginal community members are telling you differ from the mainstream narratives that you hear within like I guess the media or within history books or even the class you know the classes you take you feel that there's a disconnect between the lived experiences of community in there and I think that sort of is why I work in the space we do and thinking about sort of representation and you know and I guess like you know like talking about like I guess a razor is one of the issues that can happen a lot with these spaces thinking about even where I work at the powerhouse there's a lot of talk about firsts so they'll you know they'll usually say the first person to do this in Australia or the first Australian when they sort of mean the first you know Australian of most likely European background or like even like the powerhouse itself has a long history of documenting the history of the Sydney the Sydney train network like it's actually one of the big industries that you know we have the history of but the way it talks about OMS erases how much of that is connected to the Red Fern community and the Aboriginal community of Red Fern so I've seen the erasure that can happen in these knowledge spaces and and also to the damage of people outside your community representing your community you know I always think about when I first started at the Australian Museum I look they digitized all the Australian Museum magazine which was like kind of like a general publication but I was written by museum staff and that was between the 1920s and 1960s so I was reading these digitized copies and there was one article from 1921 that stuck out to me they were all really horrible every time they would write about Aboriginal people but this article was saying like this 1921 article that was written by one of the head anthropologists here at University of Sydney who was you know a guest writing for the Australian Museum said that grown Aboriginal men and women have the minds of small children and of course that's false but if you consider like the general public they would have received that they would have received it from the oldest museum in Australia the six oldest natural history museum in the world written by the head anthropologist at the University of Sydney they would see that as fact and that can be you know and it has you know consequences with representation not just because if you think about the same time the protection on policy practices were happening at the same time so if you were you know a non indigenous Australian that was reading from quote-unquote experts that Aboriginal grown Aboriginal men and women have the minds of small children but at the same time hearing about Aboriginal children being taken away from their families you would almost think that is justified so I guess that's sort of the influences that have got me into this space and sort of thinking about this sort of topic. Thanks Nathan. So as introductions for myself as Pru mentioned my name is Kirsten Thorpe my family are Waramai people from Port Stevens in New South Wales so you know a couple hours north of Sydney and I guess you know for me entering these spaces I think I really echo what Nathan has talked about I've been trained as an archivist you know a student of sociology before going to archival studies I'm also a sort of trained librarian but I think all of that as background has given me an ability to be around those systems and structures of how information and knowledge are created and also seeing the way that power is manifested through those structures so I guess a lot of my work has been to reconsider those power structures, reconsider how information is disseminated and try as much as possible to think about Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander participation in those processes so I think our work with Wikimedia what we've tried to do and as we explain the project is to draw on our expertise and understanding from being in institutional contexts where that power is yielded and engaging with community in a way that often as Nathan said the narratives that are in a community context aren't represented within those power structures so I think Wikimedia and Nathan and I sort of talk about it's a really interesting sort of intersection for us it's you know we have to sort of acknowledge it's not our day-to-day work thinking about Wikipedia but it's a really important topic for us and you know the more that we even talk with our colleagues about representation on Wikipedia I think that everyone is sort of saying oh yeah right we need to be there too so I think today is a bit of a conversation about our project and thinking well what might those steps be in this work so a little bit about the project as Prune mentioned we're working with Wikimedia Australia to look at questions of First Nations metadata and I think we've been thinking broadly about metadata across descriptive practices across classification and I think even in our kind of forming of this exploratory work we're also questioning ourselves about what those things mean and what they mean in different contexts which I think has been quite powerful and useful in us kind of testing our assumptions about you know what when we're talking about metadata where's it coming from who's it created by Prune mentioned really briefly that coming from Jambana research at UTS and just I guess to communicate in terms of the academic space that we work in and how we have engaged Nathan as a collaborator in this is really coming from an indigenous standpoint using indigenous research methodologies in our work but centering all the time the position of Aboriginal self-determination and sovereignty in our work so we have a really unique research institute in that we both engage with the academic disciplines that we are situated in but we're also really interested in how that work hits the ground in industry so I'll go to the next slide Nathan just talking a little bit more about the project and the methodologies that we've used we really recognize that this is such an enormous topic and we wanted as we're sort of foregrounded to draw on our expertise to look at this question of First Nations representation and metadata so it's exploratory it is a review of literature we're not going out and collecting any new data in our process but where as a research team drawing on methods such as collaborative yarning and yarning is used as a indigenous research method that bring a process that brings relational communication and bring insight through conversation into topics so it's interesting because I think we want our scope you know sometimes we have to keep bringing ourselves back to well what is realistic but I think some of the principles that are on screen around you know centering indigenous voice thinking about agency all the time we're at the core of what we're thinking about with this project yeah and I guess one of the ways we're sort of grounding it is through the ATSILEN protocol so I just will be a background about ATSILEN you know they're the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander library information resource network so they were founded in the you know the early 1990s so you know to support Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people within the library space in Australia as well as supporting mob being able to access the services and collections within library and archives and as part of that they developed in 1995 these protocols and which were revised in 2012 to incorporate the digital environment you know in that in that time the lot of digitization was starting to commence so they wanted to sort of talk about that and they touch on a range of different subjects as you can sort of see but the protocols themselves are sort of well they do have they offer a lot of guidance they are sort of you know things that can offer guidance they are designed to be used by all types of libraries so they are not particularly prescriptive so they are designed because they're designed for to be used by regional libraries as well as sort of big institutional libraries but their impact is they are quite groundbreaking you know they very much influenced the work I've done I think a lot of Aboriginal librarians have done and they you know the some people may be familiar of the NAGPRA prints of NAGPRA protocols in North America that sort of guide Native American repatriation and they were very much influenced by the ATSILM protocols and came out roughly around the same time and the University of Sydney library also developed some cultural protocols a couple years ago and the ATSILM protocols themselves were very much a big connection to that so they're we're sort of looking at that but we're very much particularly looking at product the protocol five around you know description and classification I think these protocols were really as and I think the I'm not sure if people can see it but the McDobbs and quote at the top I think is a very sort of powerful quote to think about when you're thinking about how especially for us in libraries thinking about how how welcome we can be when we have particular resources on our shelves and but I think classification description is incredibly important you know classification historically especially in the places that million person have worked have contributed to like sort of the subjection of indigenous knowledges historically like even while I was still working you know Aboriginal creation stories would be under like 394.20994 which was Aboriginal it would be Australian myths and legends so you can see that even Aboriginal creation stories were subjugated in the sort of talked about as mythology of Australian folklore compared to other creation stories and even at the Australian Museum different sort of situation but you know everything that kind of looks like a shield when it came into the Australian Museum collection was called a shield and I like you know I'm on a language learning journey so I don't know all the wordry words for shield but I know there's at least five of them and there's like even one that I know that's called like Gira Gira gearing gearing which gearing means wind so it kind of it means wind wind which you know place like Wagga is called Wagga Wagga Wagga actually means dance so Wagga Wagga actually means place of celebration of dance so thinking about that with that shield I know that's something much more complex than something to just protect oneself with but I once it has come into that space I guess that classification has sort of override its sort of meaning so we think about classification a lot and also classification is a way for mob to find the information that's within held within especially libraries archives museums in the cultural institutions you know you know knowing that stuff is radry helps people find it when they're looking in these places so I think those sort of classifications descriptions also about sort of you know mob being their right to know what about what is about them in these spaces it's basically trying to adhere to that right by helping with the classification thanks Nathan so we're going to pop up basically what are the questions that we've been exploring in this project and there's quite a few but basically as Nathan has outlined with that to learn protocols we basically have a couple of sort of prompt questions for each protocol to work through so I'm going to read some of these out related to the protocols so the first is what should wiki wiki data editors know about using national indigenous the sorai in their modeling of items and elements relating to first nations peoples languages place names and bibliographic items in an Australian context the second is what guidance can wiki media Australia give wiki pita wiki pita editors to improve the cultural appropriateness of categories articles article short description and content related to first nations peoples languages place and culture so really I think as Nathan talked about you know the sort of the detail of the classification then there's a focus more on the engagement so what kind of wiki pita articles and wiki data items should be prioritized for the community to review and update and what kind of strategies can wiki media Australia use to ensure a first nations perspective in these priorities we then sort of turn to the question of the metadata structures and schemas and you know the people that are you know organizing these so the next question is how can wiki media Australia work with other metadata organizations to improve access to appropriate class infantry systems and geographic language and cultural identifiers ensuring that custodianship of these identifiers remain with the people they describe so that's a pretty big one in itself and how do wiki media Australia collaborate with other metadata organizations to facilitate maximum consultation nationally without undue time commitment from first nations communities and then finally how do wiki media Australia build partnerships with other state based and regional libraries archives who are able to engage directly with their local communities in a way that will benefit all parties so they're they're broad questions and we you know as we've approached this we've gone into the full exploratory mode reviewing literature we can't imagine that we're going to answer any of these but our you know our pursuit is to look at well what is the literature that exists so looking you know across scholarly literature but also you know digging into websites and other reports that have been done so if there are things that after we finish that you can pass on to us we'd really appreciate that too and I think what we've found so far is that we've prompted more questions so what Nathan and I are going to do now is go through some of the early findings as we basically start to chart out what what we imagine to be a discussion paper in the context of that literature and I think what what it will shape up as being is sort of that mapping out of detail but also putting those next round of questions really at the forefront with our work and recognising other really significant work with Heather with the ARC happening making sure that this is just a start it's a little spark I guess in that so we've got to run through the findings do you want to take this one Nathan yeah sure and I think yeah what we've put up there is I was laying you maybe familiar with it anyone know about yeah yeah so it's a it's a thesaurus around Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander languages so it basically sort of helps sort of map Aboriginal languages it's based on a lot of I guess anthropological resources so and because of that it is in some cases contested but it's one of the most prominent of its type and one of the good things about it I think me and Kirsten were just talking before we started about the fact that it has been even though it's been contested it has been dynamic they have once they find more resources or have community reach out they have been updating this as it goes but it has been one of them I guess it's probably one of the most nationally recognised thesaurus is to sort of you know map Aboriginal cultural especially languages within cultural institutions yeah and so what we know from talking to people is that a lot of people talk about in terms of engaging with First Nations material on Wikipedia and in the Wikimedia context that a lot of people are afraid of getting things wrong and so even when we started to explore this question around the National thesaurus tools is that we recognise that there's a major gap apart from Osling in people having guidance and what we are sort of seeing and recommending is much more investment in participatory tools that actually like Osling enable this kind of layering of context around naming and description so for example if in a language context a community hasn't been documented or there is documentation and there are different ways of spelling or naming that that's actually sightable and people can go and look at the history of that naming so we really see and one of those first findings is that there's a real need for subject and other descriptive information to be done in the same way as an Osling type of database and that in the context of information production and looking at you know the systems that were affected by colonisation that we actually need to have thesaurus tools that go from the national to the local and so how we embed local ways of knowing is really important in that work but we kind of see Osling as a bit of an exemplar in that work so the second was really thinking about this idea of guidance for Wikipedia editors and you know one of the first things that we've been thinking through is the building of critical information literacy skills and you know the dominance of settler narratives on Wikipedia is just so profound so thinking all the time about you know building people's skills around the relevancy and appropriateness of resources it's stuff that we all know but thinking about positionality in terms of the production of material and we sort of in our conversations with Peru and the team we've sort of started thinking about well where are the sites that knowledge is produced and what participation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people had in that process and I guess having some frameworks that get people to get comfortable with that and understand both in descriptive practices that there needs to be a focus on indigenous agency in that and up on the screen I was sort of looking at the representation of where my community are from and the description of war my people and everything that is on that page is a settler narrative it's written from the view of the anthropologists that went to Port Stevens it is really limited in what it shows and I think there's been gesturally an approach that you know it's kind of like it's trying to get there but it isn't from my view a way that the community would ever represent themselves it doesn't give agency or name people in that process as well it's sort of still that kind of settler narrative being imposed so we see that as being really important the information literacy piece wanted to mention that you know this work is happening in sort of glam spaces and the leadership of IAZS Australian Institute for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies in Canberra I think is really important in this and IAZS just in the last couple of months have produced a guide to evaluating and selecting education resources and it's really effective and powerful because it's talking about well if this book was published if this source has been published what was the participation of community is it the dominance of material being written about communities so it's kind of got the structure of for mob or by mob for mob or about mob and I think some of those things will really start to get people thinking about that so I encourage you to have a look at that a little bit more so the other thing I guess we know in looking at the literature the whole conversation about filling the gap Nathan and I sort of and our colleague Lauren who I should mention is part of the project sort of thinking about that idea of well why would people want to be in the wiki spaces so I think sometimes even in Aboriginal community context science is used as a way to say to people we don't want to participate and I think the the construct of filling the gap is one that we shouldn't be looking for and so in us thinking about those Indigenous research methodologies we've been thinking about yeah getting people involved so we have these questions you know I think about who are the editors how might consent be considered in a Wikipedia context how if Indigenous people from an Australian perspective are engaging how would people consider their knowledge to be safe in a Wikipedia context what's appropriate to be shared and by who and what kind of information protocols might need to be established these are all things that in a an Indigenous knowledge framework are considered as the core parts of transmission and thinking about knowledge being used and cared for for future generations so if we put that into the Wikipedia context thinking about well what what accountability what kind of processes do we need to think about I think is really important and the consultation piece will touch on a little bit at the end but I think just building that participation is actually a different paradigm to the filling the gap conversation yeah I 100% like you know we've we're both in the space of like data sovereignty I think that will influence our work and but I also do like how you and Lauren have approached this where I think there has been that I think you as you said filling the gaps and we sort of taught I love how you know why things we're trying to do challenge with in Wikipedia's I guess even thinking about not just like terminology but like I guess deficit discourse and I think it's looking for rather than looking at any deficit angles like one of the opportunities and yeah but also to like how do we create those structures within not sort of knowledge yeah so kind of related to what Nathan was saying then was thinking about how Indigenous research principles would be affected in a Wikimedia context and one of the biggest principles in an Indigenous research frame and and that kind of goes to knowledge production is thinking about relational accountability so we were thinking about well what would participation truly look like in terms of planning to have relational accountability and also thinking about in representation on pages how do people respond to information that is harmful and seeing Wikipedia actually sometimes being a destructive tool once information is there it can be reproduced we've got other sort of political and social things like native title that really impact community so in terms of land reclamation this work becomes really serious so we've been thinking about those governance structures and you know how that privilege and is sort of intervened in and working on the principle of do no harm and on the screen are some Indigenous research principles around a model built by Archibald around Indigenous story work so we've been thinking about these ideas of the story work principles of respect, reverence, responsibility, reciprocity, holism, interrelatedness and synergy how would they operate in a context where information is flowing in much different ways how can we ensure that those kind of principles that mean everything in a process way to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities are actually embedded in that work so yeah I am you know trying to help as much as I can with this project as I'm a massive user of Wikipedia but I'm not actually I only just in the last year have become an editor so one of the things I wanted to do was actually see what would happen if I created this page here which has not been published yet like it's up for review is off my great grandmother so I wanted to do that and I did think it was interesting that the first thing Wikipedia asks is are you connected to the subject and I thought about that as like and I can understand why that's a question you know it's a way to stop sort of corporates from you know self propagating their own sort of propaganda but for me you know thinking about those indigenous principles responsibility is a big one and being connected to the subject actually is one of the ways that I'm actually means I'm much more accountable to my community I have much more responsibility to tell the story right so I don't think that is a detriment to sort of knowledge creation I think you know thinking about I guess like thinking about like authoritative sources and you know working with community in being part of community actually should not be I guess like a detriment but more for it's actually a positive yeah so our final sort of early finding that we wanted to share before we sort of have some summing up points is just thinking about the concept of data governance and decision-making you know a wiki context and I know sort of as Nathan and I have been talking more and more about this work speaking to colleagues in our team and people who have had pages created on them and in a community context and feeling really both sort of mortified that they've been pages created on their work because they feel like in their community they're sort of big noting themselves or there's been no participation in informed consent and I think as Nathan and I have given that background information has been used as a weapon against Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people so you know whether it's from government or the anthropologists or this there's been such a system and a tool of information being used against people so even the act of trying to raise the profile of people who might have publicly accessible material still doesn't give them the time to go home and say to their family in that relational accountability hey there's going to be stuff about me it doesn't mean that so there's there's no extra context of them being able to say you know I learnt all this stuff from my aunt or my grandmother there's sort of just this stepping into a place that I think makes people really uncomfortable so I think thinking about informed consent all the time is also really important and as Nathan mentioned just as the final point thinking about the indigenous data sovereignty movement and what that means in a wiki context I think is really important so I might just do my sort of quick summing up and then hand over to Nathan I hope that those early findings are food for thought for you we we realize in us engaging in this topic that we're actually generating more questions than answering anything but really appreciate the opportunity of coming here and speaking to you and I guess Nathan and I are one of the things that we're trying to grasp in terms of our work is we've seen the damage of that weaponization in the context of glam and we're always thinking about where are the new sites of power or where are the sites that will perpetuate that harm and how might might we transfer some of those skills over so thank you for listening yeah thank you I have no idea of time so I don't know if we've got time for questions great yarn I know that there have been some efforts by the legacy anthropological collections to reflect restrictions on some forms of traditional knowledge like they might have gendered access to particular collections for example are there similar efforts underway in any Wikimedia projects I'm not that I'm aware of I mean we always sort of use the exemplar of the noongar work that's happened but my feeling is that even the the institutions like the glam context hasn't got that stuff right at the moment there's so much thinking that from the debates of you know I think the data sovereignty movement is probably saying that you know the institutions are now embedding these protocols and they're stopping research happening but for me it's actually a time of holding space saying we need to think through or what are the processes with this so I mean the my one thing as a response to the question is you wouldn't want that material to be made accessible in a Wikipedia context if the harm is there to further dislocate communities you know to know that stuff is in institutions I think is complex in itself but to be on a platform in that way would be even more damaging I'm interested I've been heavily involved with the noongar work and what I was wondering is people having that authority to speak and to give the information how do you capture that type of situation where you can have a location with four or five different people with different stories and who has the authority to speak about it and then the other side of the equation when you record something or record knowledge you're fixing it in a point in time rather than you're taking away that oral piece of tradition and letting knowledge grow and develop how do you deal with that yeah I guess that's one of the challenges that we even are thinking about with say like the National Theosaurus is I guess the contested nation but also the fact that there's we need to embed dynamicism and I think that's one of the problems we've captured recording information and that's why I still see even yawning with a lot of mob why they want to embed things like data sovereignty and I think one of the things I see a lot is mob wanting the ability to which I guess is it a difficult again it's probably more of a I guess a question rather than I'm having an answer but mob wanting that space to have the white to withdraw like because generationally the governance around that information may change like I I even know working at the powerhouse there was we created an education kit that was with local elders and the local elders were involved in making it but the generation that followed them basically have said that that information should be secret sacred and what and it was and they were just thinking about the different you could argue that there was informed consent but the power dynamics at the different periods of time have shifted and the community feel like much stronger that they can say no to being that information being out so I guess it's yeah it's it's trying to create space for because I I do believe informed consent is not ever lasting so it is it is a negotiation that should be changing and I guess we've contested knowledge I can't and of course this will be something we examine but I know from a glam standpoint we are trying to embed sort of pluralism into our collection so that you know mob from that may you know as you're saying like may all be traditional owners of one cultural site can tell all their stories and we don't we at the you know at in museums are not saying which one is right or wrong it's just the communities different perspectives and the only thing I would add to Nathan's comments is that that's why we've had such a strong focus on you know what does relational accountability mean because that means that things are dynamic and they change and you know one thing for me is and with places like Wikipedia thinking about how community can be empowered to have that tool so that they can be the makers of that dynamic those sites being dynamic and so there's a whole other question of that engagement but I think the concept of relational accountability gets back to we're actually talking about two fundamentally different paradigms of knowledge dissemination and there are opportunities there to think about them but we have to get some back to some of them core things like yeah people knowing different stories in different places in different ways and the question of authority yeah it all becomes very wishy washy in that in that work and thinking about things being living but I think for me it is that empowerment for people to be able to tell their own stories or be engaged in that dialogue thank you very much that was really interesting it's sort of a question and a comment I wrote a report for the Wikimedia Foundation about having sort of trusted knowledge you know creating standardized data and structured data about Aboriginal knowledge systems and I think one of the issues was like you said about not being able to cite or reference something like oral tradition and that challenge but my question here to the whole community is what sort of struck me is that Wikimedia and to an extent the museum cultures of Western European traditions treat living knowledge systems a little bit like butterflies and you catch them in a net and you lay them out dead in a glass case and categorize them but as a knowledge system indigenous knowledge is a bit more resilient than our servers so far and probably will be so I think my question to everyone here is also how can something like the Wikimedia Foundation support living knowledge systems which you know often are critically endangered around the world if I can use that phrase rather than be extractive and to create a power dynamic where it is also strengthening those knowledge systems rather than just extracting from them that's something I'm I don't know the answer to and I'd love to hear people's thoughts thank you thank you I don't think we have the answers but it's good to be in the dialogue and I I think you know for me all my doctoral studies looked at you know sort of the steps that we need to do to reform some of these issues of representation but you know as I mentioned before it's it's actually shifting the paradigm to more transformative approaches that aren't extractive I think that's the biggest damage is to build these systems and think that you're saving something where it's actually living somewhere else and so you need to go to those places where things are living and you need to support communities with the power of you know information structures knowledge management you know I think that what we see in Australia is communities crying out for that support but they also don't want people to take their information away from where it belongs so I think there's a lot that we can do but it's kind of being careful about not perpetuating harm in those colonial practices that's our sort of biggest warning I think you know Nathan and I touched on the data sovereignty movement it is so vital to this work in thinking about data in a much more expensive way and taking responsibility for data governance in ways that people haven't thought about before just a really big thanks to Nathan and to Kirsten and also to Jack for because I think this is a dialogue this is what this is about it's about relationships and the answers are actually in the room they're not in you know we need it's not a you know I like that thing Nathan about not taking the deficit gap analogy which we do too easily so I think you know it's about what's the positives from both both sides and how do we start relating and working together so thank you so much for taking the time we really look forward to the report which we know is a question other just another set of questions that's fantastic thanks everyone.