 Some of the board members cannot attend this General Assembly, like Bocha, for example. And Oier is the second one. Bocha cannot attend because he didn't get free from his employer, new employer, so he took on a new job. Oier unfortunately broke his leg on the very first day in the morning, just before we opened everything. So he worked really, really hard on the conference and didn't really get to enjoy it, so it's a bit sad. And so I think he's still in hospital, right? Yeah. Oh yeah. Is this being live streamed? Yeah. Yeah? That's very good. So hi Oier. Well, first of all, a big welcome to all the new EPS members. We just had this very, very short board meeting where we voted in another six new board members, new EPS members. So we now have 172 members. Of course we always like to get new members and people can just sign up on the website and then every now and then the board then meets and votes in the new members. The General Assembly is for the EPS is very formal because the agenda for the General Assembly is basically baked right into the bylaws. So we have to follow it. The first thing that we need to do is we need to select a chairman of the meeting, secretary, two checkers of the minutes. And then we need the first thing that we need to do is the motion to establish the timeliness of the call to the meeting. The bylaws state that we have to call for the meeting at least 14 days before the meeting. And the last things that can go on the agenda have to be announced to the members at least five days before the meeting. So let's start with the first one, meeting chairman who wants to run the, for example, the voting process. Moderate, Alex maybe? Yeah, okay, you do it. Then we need a secretary. So basically the person taking the minutes. You're taking the minutes? Okay. Then we need two checkers of the minutes. We're going to check the minutes right after the meeting. So it's not, it's not something that takes us long. It's just, okay, Vicky and one more. And Robin. Perfect. So we have two checkers. I think we need to write these down, right? You have to manage the voting. Yeah, raise hands, you can't, and then you need to write that down. No, no, Stefan is taking the notes. So are you going to be a checker? So we still need a secretary. So can we have someone who's good at writing English and can do the minutes? Take notes what the actions we are taking. I need to write. Yeah, there you go. Thank you, Flores. Yeah, it's better to come down here probably. You need to manage the voting. The agenda is more or less given. So there's nothing much to do there. And it's all listed on the slide. So the first thing that you have to note is when we started the meeting. So that is 1440. Okay. So we started 1440. Chair of the meeting is Alex. Then we have one checker is Raul and the other one is Stefan. I think Vicky also wanted to check, right? So we have three checkers. Okay, so the first... Sorry? Vicky. So now it's your job. We need a motion for establishing the timeliness of the call of the meeting. Yes, in favor, abstain and who's against. Let me just open the cards this year. So we wrote a blog post for the invite. This is the invite. And it was sent on two weeks ago. There you go. It was sent on, what's that? July 6th. Yes. And then the last things that were put on the agenda, that was an email from Kirsten. She wrote that email on Saturday. So it's five days before the meeting. So we can take those into account as well. Yeah, we'll be reading the email later. Right, yeah. We can show the email. So now we need to vote on this. Alex, so first part is done. Then we have the annual report by the board. I'm going to do this part and then I'm going to pass on to Fabio. So these are the EuroPython 2015 results. This data is from March 2016. So the total revenue of the conference was about 530,000 euros. We made a profit of 92,777 euros and 60 cents. And the EPS share for this because the EPS gets 50%. We always share with the onsite organization. We get 46,388.80 euros. And of that share we have already received 1,000 euros to a PayPal account. We're going to go into that issue later on. It's not really an issue. It's not that the ACPS doesn't want to pay us. The issue is that we don't have access to our own bank account. So it doesn't really make sense sending money there because we cannot get it out again. So compared to EuroPython 2014, that's an order of magnitude higher, which is quite amazing. And for this year, the expectation is that we're probably going to be in at least that five digit range again. Yeah, that's a good question. It's also a question that we've asked ourselves. I'm happy with that. Yes, there is... I think, yeah, I just went on this. I think it's... On the board members, we have discussed a lot of times like the EuroPython society not being only EuroPython confidence driven. So supporting local... You take away all the thunder. Well, yeah, to improve things in general. So the only thing I want to add, we add here is that in Sweden, as far as Jacob told us a couple of years ago, you have to watch out once you reach a bank account balance of about 100,000 euros. I'm not sure whether that number is correct, whether this... It's an approximate number. Yes, so if at any one point you have more than that amount in the bank, then you need to do extra stuff and you need to be careful. We're not at that level yet, so we don't have to really worry right now. We may have to worry maybe next year, but we're going to have some other things that we want to tell you to maybe resolve this. So if you were not here at the previous talk, we already gave the timeline of the conference. So I'm just going to go through this very quickly. So we had the election of the new board in July last year. In November we launched the preview site and then in January we started work on this year's conference. And then we went through all the phases of that, like launch a website, launch a ticket sales, a call for proposals, then talk voting. The financial aid program we had again, which was generously sponsored by the PSF in most parts. So we added some money as well, of course, but most of it actually came from the PSF. And I also still have to do a blog post about that. I already wrote a nice summary, but I still have to turn that into a blog post. So I'm probably going to do that tomorrow. Then we had the second CFP, which was due this year. We wanted to, because the first CFP is about, when was it, like five months before the conference? More or less? Okay, less. Originally you wanted to do everything a little earlier, but turn it to be a bit later. We wanted to have the possibility to react to new hard things that happened just before the conference. Because if there's a long delay between the conference and the CFP, then basically you lose on some of the new developments. Like, for example, a new PEP was released or accepted and you want someone to do a talk about that. Of course, you cannot know six months or five months before the conference. So we have the second phase to address that. And that was new. That was a new idea of the program work group. Then we had a new conference app this year. We switched from Guidebook Away to Attendify, and Attendify has so far been really good. We really like it and we're probably going to stay with it. And then, of course, we had the conference and general assembly today. This is a chart showing the ticket sales. You can see in the background, you can see this yellowish-brownish curve. That's 2015, and the purple one is 2016. So it looks more or less the same. We started a bit earlier. And down there, the smaller ones are the social event tickets. So this is a snapshot of July 14th. That's when I updated these slides. In the end, the curve looked, well, it basically looked like the 2015 one. So there wasn't much change there. Account the tickets bought on desk, I think. Right. The on desk tickets are not included in this. I think today is the 21st. Oh, yeah, right. Maybe just for the protocol that might be a problem. Better? Right. So in the end, we sold about 1,100 tickets, plus some onsite. I don't have the exact numbers for that. So what's new in 2016? Well, the major new development was adding the telegram groups to help work in those workgroups. That was a really good thing to do. It's also much more fun doing it that way. Then we invited more volunteers and we also, we rearranged the workgroup memberships, moved all the inactive ones to the inactive members and then voted in a few, or the board voted in a few new voting members for those workgroups to make it not look like the workgroups are huge and have lots of members. Because if we put on the website, if we then have the long lists of members in each workgroup, people that want to volunteer for working in those workgroups usually tend to think, well, they already have enough people, so we're not going to sign up. Right. And that's an issue. And so we're trying to address that by doing this every now and then. And then we had to fix a few website issues, like, for example, the odd assignment of tickets. We didn't have that last year. We added that this year. So that tickets automatically get assigned to the person buying the ticket. Yeah, still some work to do, still some bucks to fix. Right. And again, we had a bit of an issue with the number of really active people. So we turned out that even though we do have quite a few members in those working groups, only few of those members are really doing a lot of work. And we are trying to fix this. As you can see, most of the board members or actually all the board members were really active. And then we had these three people down here. I think they deserve a give them a hand. So just to name them is Alexander Handorf. He is working for the program group. He's sitting down here. He's shy. He doesn't want to. But he has to stand up anyway later on because he's running for board. Then we have Christian Barra, who's also running for board. He's sitting here, down here in the green one. And we have Ricardo Savio, Alex's second incarnation, where we see. Yes. There you are. Yeah, that's Ricardo. And he also helped a lot. So thank you very much to you guys. It doesn't mean that we didn't have other volunteers. It just means like really a huge amount of work. So they did a lot of work, much more than everyone or the other volunteers. So sorry for 2016, working with the ACPISS, the local organization worked really, really well again. We had open discussions and everything was done in consensus. And this is what we like to see going forward as well. And so that's why we did this call for interest now to get to know people better. In the previous years, we had a contract with the local organizer. We had one for 2015. We're going to just use the same one for 2016 because everything worked out well. There are no reasons to change it. We're just going to change the dates. I think it's time for you to take over, right? Yeah, keep tracking. As we mentioned before, we had quite a few continued improvements to the website. The auto assignment of tickets was a big deal. But also the AD also to help with the registration desk. We made a lot of new tools, internal tools of the website to help with the administration and managing the accounts. And also the integration with the conference app. We had three repos that we merged into one, which is far easier to maintain. We are running now on DPS server using Docker containers. As far as I know, that's working well. Otherwise, we will notice on the website. So the future call for papers for Python. Those will basically focus on the on-site team. And all the other working groups will remain active. We will try to make it much easier to apply while we're working on it. And basically trim out all the extra things that are not really related to venue and countering local support and all the small details. Those can be continued to be carried on by the working groups. Basically, we want all these things to make things easier for the local group at the same time. It's really important that they work inside the group, work groups as well, integrate well with the current ecosystem that we're building. The DPS or the on-site team will enter the contracts with the venue, countering and other stuff. It's likely that it's easier for local teams to have contracts with venues. In some countries, venues, if they're foreign companies, they require a higher deposit or stuff like this. And it may impact on budgets and money wise. This year we are doing this new approach to call for a proposal. We are running two phases, mostly because to make things easier, we will have a not really formal proposal that we call for interest. Basically, a group will show up with enough clear ideas and a plan that is not just on the clouds, but some real group that is there to have venue options. We put better details in the call itself and then we follow up with the call for papers. For the future, it's probably going to happen before. This year we were quite full with everything. So far we had two interests, but one was basically communicated that they would not go ahead. We have the Python-Ethiag group, which is proposing for Milan or surrounding areas. And the Python UK, as I said, is not going to go ahead. Regarding domains, we tried hard to get back to europeanthen.org without success for now. I'm not sure we can do much more, but let's see. We tried all kinds of things. We tried this ICANN process to try to get it back, but in the end ICANN changed the process recently. I had a look again and it will probably require a lawyer for this, because the person owning it does not react to anything in Germany. I think it's close to you. Maybe you should just go there and then we'll see. Knock on his door. But it's not high priority, because we're using the dot.org domain for everything now. And the dot.org domain redirects to the ego. So that still works, but emails, for example, they bounce. I should discuss that afterwards. I know that there was this process in previous years, but I recently looked on the ICANN website and couldn't find that process anymore. And so they seem to have changed something. They would like to say that the lawyer is not needed, but at the end of the day, it seems that the other partner is the lawyer, because then, in theory, it's not required. Thanks. So yeah, regarding trademarks and logos, the marketing and design work group hired a designer to update the logo. That process went through the ACP and PSS. Basically, similar way like last year. Nice outcome as well. So we still have quite a few issues, especially regarding being a nonprofit in Sweden, especially because we don't have board members in Sweden as well. We need to address the docs reporting. Nothing has been really done in that matter. The accounting, we have been trying for a year to find an accountant with a lot of frustrations and time wasted. Yeah, not a good experience. We didn't manage to contact and deal with local authorities. And also, we didn't have much luck with emails and phone calls and all this kind of stuff. Being in Sweden has been a really hard problem for now. Actually, it seems we do have a solution for this now. I met Anders at the conference. Anders is from OpenEnd as well, which is convenient because the Swedish registered address is at OpenEnd. He offered to help us with this. Maybe you can say a few words. I read about these problems you're having with the societies. I decided that I should step up and offer my help. We haven't actually discussed how I will help yet. We're going to do that afterwards. I'll do my best to help get this sorted. Thank you. Part of the things that we need is finding a solution for VAT invoices. So far, what we have until today is collecting information and discussing things. It's very likely that we will require removing the EPS because we really need to enter either contracts with venues or invoice sponsors and be able to receive money. All these problems are very real. And to grow the EPS, it would be better also to provide a backup for all those things that are needed to back up for future conferences. That's a good point. Yes, correct. The idea is that we want to build up a bit of a budget reserve that we can then use to do... Can I have a quick question about this moving? Does this European foundation exist already? Or do you want to move to one single country in the EU? Apparently, there is this movement to create something like a European association. It's been there for five years at least. They've been... Go ahead. Exactly. Also, the European guideline on the formation of European companies specifically and expressly excludes non-profits. I've been looking at this every now and then again to see whether there's some kind of update, but there wasn't any. We basically just looked at various different countries where you can incorporate. But we're going to get to that afterwards. I just want to continue here now because that's one of the things that we want to discuss. We're still in this reporting phase. In the end, the long-term goal that we want to achieve is we want to turn the EPS into something like a European Python Software Foundation. We want to have a regional kind of PSF, so to say. We want to be able to issue grants, for example, to Python projects in Europe or to user groups or to help smaller conferences with grants. We want to build closer ties both to the PSF and also to the community in Europe itself because we have a lot of members in the EPS that have very close ties to their local groups. In the end, the wish is that we have to build something like a tree, a tree just upside down, so that you have lots and lots of leaves that are centered locally and it all goes up to the PSF eventually. So that's sort of like the long-term goal of where this could go. Okay, Treasurer Report. This is actually something that Anton and Bocha should do. Bocha is not here. Anton, you want to say something? Well, given the context that we discussed before, as a Treasurer, I have primarily been trying to get access to the Swedish bank accounts and the Swedish bank manager that has been partly not successful because I haven't been in system for long enough and the other part is what didn't help is that a previous Treasurer has been ill and not been able to respond like within weeks time opportunities of me going to go to Berg wants to get the signatures and all that things being arranged. I have been in contact with one person who could do the accounting for maybe this first year, not maybe, they could do it for the first year, but since we want to extend the activities of the EPS to do more of the contracting and setting up things like the collection of the money with Visa cards and credit cards, so that doesn't have to be done with each change of venue and learned by the local organization, there will be more accounting work and for that we haven't found anybody yet, although we've tried to view accounts. What really didn't help is my lack of Swedish and not being, not willing to go there just to try and stand on the street corners like who wants to be our accountant. I'll go there once we know that we can get everything signed that is signable because it's not just trivial to be there and it costs money. So there's no, at this point, no overview of the exact state of the bank accounts. Jacob has been willing to transfer money when necessary from the bank account to our PayPal accounts and from that we do the monthly payments that we have for our server, about 100 euros a month and then smaller amounts for the... for the DNS... Domain registration. Domain registration. And that's about it. Most of the costs for running the conference were basically put into the conference budget itself, so they were paid by the ACPYSS, not the EPS, so we did not have much of an issue except that at one point this year, for example, the PayPal account went down to more or less zero, so we had to ask the ACPYSS to send us some money from the profit from last year into the PayPal account so that we could pay the server again. So what we do now is we have two accounts at the bank. One is in SEK, Swedish Corner, and the other is Euro. The current assets are probably going to be around 10,000 euros. It's slightly more than that, but this is just an estimate based on the figure that we got for the last General Assembly. That is without. Yes. And the PayPal account is currently... I would have to look that up. I don't really know. 10,000 euros in any case. Right, so next is the auditor report. That would be Alexander Handoff. I did the auditing. Obviously, I couldn't check on the bank accounts in Sweden, as Anton explained. I did check. I had a transaction list from the PayPal account. I got all the corresponding invoices for servers and stuff. I was able to review the loss and profits of 2005 compared to the transactions and invoices. I was getting all the access, basically all the booking being everything was on file, and I can say everything was fine. So from knowing, I suggest to accept the board as the right one. Okay, go to this chart. Well, you know, the Swedish bank account, but if Jacob has run with the money, I mean, it should be there. We used it last year. You have 12 minutes left? We're going to run over. Right, we're going to speed up now. What we wanted to do before voting for the board is we would like to increase the number of board members that we can have in the EPS as maximum. Right now, the bylaws say that we can have two to six directors plus one chair. So you get nine, currently you get seven directors in total, and we would like to increase that to two to eight directors plus one chair, giving us nine directors in total. And the reason why we want to do this is because the EPS board members are the most active ones doing the running the Euro-Python conference, and we simply need more people helping us with this. And so we'd like to extend the number of directors that we have in the EPS to a total of nine. Any comments on this? Suggestions? Extras? We don't have that in the bylaws now. We don't. What we're doing is, and we're going to do this again this year, we have created something which is not really in the bylaws. We have board members from previous boards that stay on the board mailing list, and then they can help us because they have institutional knowledge, and we can ask them for comments. So basically they are non-voting, of course, but they still can see the actions of the board. And this has worked out well in the past, and we'd like to keep it that way. It's not really enshrined in the bylaws. And those people usually don't have enough time to actually help actively in the organization. No, no. Everyone is very much active and willing to help, unless they, of course, have other issues where they cannot attend. But apart from that, we've never had an issue, with getting a quorum to actually do voting in the board meetings. So that's not been an issue. I know that increasing the number even more, so for example to 11, that can create problems because I've been on the PSF board for quite a while, and we have 11 directors on the PSF board, and getting a quorum was very often, at least recently, until we changed the model that we can also have proxy votes. It was difficult. I think now we can confirm that. Would it be a good idea to have always an uneven number of directors? Sorry? Some foundations have an uneven number. They require either 3, 5, 7, or 9, or something like this. They don't have even numbers, so you would always have a decision. We have an uneven as well. I mean, it's 9 directors. One director is called Chair. The Chair doesn't have any special meaning. That's a maximum number, 9. It can be either 7 or 9, but not 8, that's what I mean, because even before and for and against, you might have a problem, you cannot reach a decision. I don't know if this is a problem. You need 50% or how much you need to have a quorum. If it's 9, you need 5 people. Just from experience, maybe a comment on this. So far we've mostly done all the resolutions on the board, unanimously. There were maybe sometimes abstentions, because people were in conflict of interest, but apart from that, we never had the case where we could not reach a decision. Also, I share the idea not to block by having even numbers, but it would also mean that if we, for example, have 8 candidates for the board, we would have to cut down to 7. Yeah, well, I mean, if we... Yeah, but if we won't have somebody saying, hey, I'm really happy to join the board to do a lot of work, we really depend on it, I think. Yeah, my quick thought on this is I would rather have an extra two hands helping during the year than having a potential problem. Communication has been really, really good so far with all the members. Yeah, so it hasn't posed a problem in the past. I don't think it's going to pose a problem in the future. So, who's in favour of the proposition? Who's against? Against? No, sir. Okay. Absent? Okay. Full vote. Cool. In favour. Thank you. Thank you. So, the next part is candidates for the board for the next term, 2016, 2017. So, these are the candidates that we have. We sent around a blog post describing every single one. Should we perhaps ask everyone to maybe come up on the stage and do a sentence or two, or should we go directly to a vote? We had time issues. So, yeah. We can still vote on everyone. Actually, I would rather not do this because we had this last year and we didn't work out then. And so, I don't want discussions again. So, let's just vote on every single one. We tried to do that as well last year. It didn't work. I wish. Okay, we can of course have everyone stand up here and say a few words if you like that. What's the general kind of feeling? Should we? That's a good idea. That's a very good idea. Yes. But before we do this, we have one extra agenda item, which is we have to decide now. The bylaws state now with this change that we just voted on. It states that we have one chair plus two to eight board members. And we now have to decide how many board members we want to have for the next period. We're going to get to this particular point later on because there's a member's motion suggesting to remove this part and always use the maximum number. But we have to vote on this now because the bylaws currently look like this. So we have to, we recommend leaving the board size to the set to the maximum. So having eight board members, sorry, nine board members in total, eight directors and a chair. So you have to call for a vote now. Who's in favor? Against. Absent. Okay, full vote. Great. And now we can actually vote on the board members. And I suggest that Borja stand up. Borja is not here. He did a really good job. He was excellent in negotiations with the venue and the caterer. He deserves a good hand for getting us the food. Well, not better food, but let's say different food. Different food. Different food this year. I think a lot of people appreciated that. So votes for Borja in favor. Against. Absent. Okay, full vote. In favor. Next one is Christian. So my name is Christian. I'm a member of the organizer from the first edition of Europe Python with Baal. And yes, I plan to submit the next proposal for the next conference in one hour, I think. In favor. Against. Absent. Okay, full vote in favor. Oje. Oje, let me open the chat. Just a second. Because he seems to be online. Yeah, he just texted. Yes, okay. So let's move on to... Sorry? No, no. Oh, you can't read it. Just a second. Votes in favor. Against. Absent. Okay, full vote. My name is Daria. I was here last year. I was organizer in the organizing team last year and I'm here for this conference and maybe for the next, I hope so. So in favor of Daria. Thank you, Mr. Savio. Yes, I'm Alexander. I joined last year organizing the first billboard conference and I've been on the program work group and helping with all the stuff. Yeah, I need to say something right. So... So yeah, I'm Mark Lemberg. I've been working with the new EPS structure for quite a while now. I really love the work. It's a lot of work. And I love to continue working on it and moving the EPS forward and like what we already mentioned moving it more into the Python community and basing it more in the Python community. So it makes the whole thing a bit more than just a conference organization. And that's what we might go. In favor. Against. Absent. Okay, thank you. Full vote. In favor. On the further notes from Holland I've been board member for three years now to get a bit of Mark Andre apart from my attempts in getting the Treasury in hands. I'm on the Code of Conduct Committee and I'm the one pushing your video to archive.org and YouTube after the show. Yeah, that's about it. And I fold your t-shirt. I guess. Okay, full vote in favor. In favor. In favor. Now my turn. Well, I'm a co-founder of the ACPISS the local team that has been organizing the Europe Python in Bilbao. I have been EPS board member this year. I'm running again for candidates. I mostly have been in contact with the sponsors working together with Alex, the other Alex for program. Yeah, that's it. In favor. Against. Absent. Okay, thank you. Full vote. In favor. So then we have a non-voting, Emericious. And all year we didn't vote for all year. Oh, we need to vote for all year. Do you want me to speak for him? Yeah. Okay, so he helped with the web work group. He was an EPS board member this year. He's running again. He worked with the web. He's also a co-founder of the ACPISS. He's actually the president. He has been doing the refunds. What else? Communications. We have 10 minutes left. In favor. Against. Absent. Okay, thank you. Full vote. In favor. Okay, I'm full vote. For the... Sorry? He's not running for vote now. Yeah, right. So I don't think we need to vote for the non-voting Emericious. Because the bylaws simply don't state anything about them. But we want to have Vicky. And we want to have Vicky, by the way, is back there. She wasn't there last year. So she was a board member in 2012, 2012, 2013. Yes. Right. No, we don't have to vote for them. And Fabio as well. Fabio stepped down. So he was the chair of the EPS in the last year. So give him a hand. Do not talk for a while. Maybe at the closing I would just say thank you. But it has been a pleasure to work with everyone and stepping back just to give more space to more active people for family issues. So that's that. So next is election of the chair of the board because Fabio stepped down. I decided to throw in my hand. So basically I already said everything that I wanted to say about the EPS and how to move forward. I've been involved in this particular conference edition quite a bit. And I would like to do the same for next year. And if you want me, you can have me. Votes in favor? Against? Absent? Okay, thank you. Thank you very much for your trust. Right. So now we need an auditor again and one replacement. So basically auditor was Alex Hendorf. Alex Hendorf. See, it's funny using telegram. He was auditor last year. There are no special requirements for auditors. So if Alex wants to do it again, for example, then he could. Looking at you. No? So we need someone else to do it. Basically what you get to do is you get to see all the bank accounts or not. You get all the paperwork that we can provide you to do a proper job at auditing the stuff that's available. Stefan? Okay. And we need one replacement. Against, in case Stefan is not available. It's very unlikely. You can? Raul? Okay. Raul is back up for Stefan. We need to vote on this. In favor? Against? Absent? Okay, full vote. In favor? Okay. For Raul as a replacement in favor? Against? Absent? Thank you. Okay, so next is an optional election of a nomination committee. This is for nominating board members. So far we've never had this. I don't think we really need this because anyone can just self-nominate. So the idea is to not have one. Anyone against this? Oh, sorry. Alex, your job. In favor? In favor of not having one. Against? Okay, cool. Next one. Budget presentation. So there isn't much to present here for the next year. The biggest expense that we do have is the server that we use. It's about 100 euros per month. And then maybe a small figure for domains. We expect again a good income for 2016. And because most of the invoices and everything else, for this year is paid by the ACPYSS, there isn't much for the EPS to actually have in the budget. Alex, any questions? No. So there's nothing much that we can present in terms of budget. The next thing is membership fee. Membership doesn't cost anything. We'd like to keep it that way. So we need to vote on this again. In favor? Against? Absent? Okay, thank you. Next proposition from the board is to broaden the membership of the EPS to make it possible for anyone using Python in Europe. Or it's not restricted to Europe itself. We want to further the use of Python in Europe. And we want to make it possible for anyone furthering the EPS mission to enable them to become an EPS member. So that's the idea. And the second idea is that we rebase the EPS from Gothenburg, Sweden to another EU country. Yeah? Right now the focus is just on organizing the conference. Yes, we had people who wanted to become an EPS member because they understood the EPS as being already something like a European PSF and so they wanted to join and we had to turn them down because our bylaws say if you're not organizing a conference then you cannot be a member, right? Or attending the conference. Or attending the conference, yes. Yes, yes, of course. This is just the intro, right? And the second one is to initiate the rebasing of the EPS from Gothenburg to another EU country. So this is the intro. So the first proposal is broaden the membership. Ah, it's the same thing again. So I'm just going to skip this. So we need a bylaws change. So this is the proposal for the bylaws change. So the purpose is to further the use of the programming language Python in Europe and organize events centered around the programming language Python to support this. And we need the second one. Second change, membership is open to individuals which we just defined in number two. So that is the proposed change. What is OE writing? Any comments on this? Discussion? No? And that's all? In favor of change the bylaws. Okay, in favor? Against? Absent? Okay, full vote in favor. Okay, next one is the rebasing the EPS. So this is not yet what to vote on. This is just a summary. So the rebasing of the EPS would work in two steps. The first step is to create a new nonprofit as subsidiary of the EPS in another EU country. And the second step would then be to move over all the assets from the EPS in Sweden to that new entity that we've created in the first step and then to close down the EPS in Sweden. So at this general assembly, we can of course only vote on the first one which is to charge the board with the creation of the full subsidiary in the country to be determined by the board of the directors according to the criteria as indicated in the documents sent to the members list by Anton earlier on in July. So Anton created this document where he analyzed various different countries and then we also had a few extra input from members on the members list. Of course, we're going to look at that as well and then we're going to try to figure out which is the best place to go to. So just as a very short summary of why we want to do this, the most important thing is that we currently cannot get a VAT ID and so we cannot be financially operational as an organization. And because we tried last year to get one and it failed, the authorities are very unlikely to give us one because we'd have to convince them that the failure last year was not, there was something wrong with the application or something and this would be very difficult to do. And the second thing is that, of course, we don't have access to the bank accounts and this whole issue would not go away and then there's a third issue that is that there is no registry in Sweden for non-profits so it's extremely difficult to convince anyone that you as, for example, director or as treasurer of the EPS are actually authorized as such. So all we have is we can give them a signed document with all the signatures from all the directors and that's it. And so there's no official way of getting that information. Okay, we need to hurry up. So can we vote for this? In favor? Against? Absent? Okay, full vote in favor. So the next one is the email from Kristen. There's actually two emails. It's going to be really quick here. Hopefully this is the first one. This is probably too small to read. So basically what she recommends is in here she wants to find some kind of minimum for the number of board members. I assume you've already read this on the mailing list. And then she wants to, she proposes to remove this 0.8 which says determination of the size of the board for the period until the next annual meeting of the General Assembly, which is part 0.8 of the current binos. She proposes to remove that. The first part about this minimum aspect, she, I really have to hurry up, she retracted again in the second email because this is already part of the bylaws. And so she proposes to just vote on the second one to remove this 0.8 from the agenda. I think it's a good idea. We just had this vote and always using the maximum is certainly a good thing to do. If you have lots of people who want to help, then of course make them help, right? So just always have the maximum of the four limits. Yes, you cannot, for example, if you just have like three candidates, then three is okay. If you have two candidates, two is okay. If you have one candidate, it's not okay. Right. But of course, and if you have more than eight or nine candidates, then of course you have to choose. So we don't really lose anything. We just gain something. In favor, against, absent, to absent. Cool. General discussion. Anything to discuss? We can discuss outside, having a coffee maybe or something. Yeah, good suggestion. Yes, let's close the meeting. We're closing at 15.47. Cool. So thank you very much. Thank you. Believe it or not, this was the quickest general meeting.