 computers cooperate. But I'm good, we should be live any moment here if we're not already. I'll wait to get to the official green light. Copy that link and the page loads. I'll say hi, my friends. Cool, drop the link in there. Do you all have the minutes? I will drop that in the chat. Some housekeeping here for everybody. And yeah, so we're live. Thanks everybody for joining another episode of the OpenJS Foundations Cross-Project Council Meeting. Today is the 11th day of the fifth month. Thanks everybody for joining. Where do we start? Do we have any announcements? It's a good place to start, right? Always, I mean, we're coming down to the last few weeks ahead of OpenJS World. We're really excited about the program and we hope everybody here has had a chance to register. We've got some channels open in our Slack word now. So if you wanna come sort of like preach out about any of the topics and also kind of related, we're recruiting folks who wanna come help moderate and prompt discussion in those channels. Please let me know if that's you. That's, these are the big ones. I've been out of the office for two days. So now I'm like, what's going on? I forgot. What are those channels? Oh yeah, so they're all prefixed with OpenJS World and I can just run through. So we've got OpenJS World Automation, community, development, performance, security. Obviously we've got a speaker help channel and a general channel as well, just sort of to make up some extent for that hallway track that we're missing out on by not being able to be together in person. But next year, next year, Boston, 2022. Hearing a little bit of background noise in an off, somebody's got a TV on or something. That's my washing machine, I'm needed. Washing machine? It sounded like a TV to me. That's hilarious. Funny, funny, funny. Cool, sorry to interrupt. Anything else, like we've got some great featured speakers and stuff. I can't recall if we have anything new there or anything. Yeah, I must say it's really impressive. It's great, congrats. It's rare to see a lineup like this. It's amazing. Yeah, yeah, I agree. I'm excited about it. It's all your friends, everybody watching, sign up. OpenJSworld.com works, right? So go check that out. Anything else, anything from the board? Anything before we get into the agenda? I think it's worth mentioning that, oops, I'm on mute. No, you're not. I think it's worth mentioning that the kickoff meeting for the package vulnerability management collaboration space is later today. Some confusion, my fault, that it was the same time as this meeting, but it's at three, so 12 PST or three Eastern. I see. Now it makes sense. It's not the package maintenance team and node. It's the collaboration space in OpenJS. Cool. That's right. Cool, great. That's exciting. And the only other board-related thing, we've got an issue to talk about it so I'll wait until then. Okay, all right, cool. All right, well, with that, I'll just mention again real quickly, we'll save a little bit of time at the end for some private business and we'll jump into the agenda. And of course, if anybody can help take notes, that's always appreciated. We mark you down on a list and send you a card at the end of the year. The first item on the agenda is create proposals for the community fund. Maybe this, Michael, is what you were referring to. No, but related. Okay, Toby, you open this issue. Do you wanna add any context or elaborate? Just a placeholder to make sure that we actually do it. So, well, it ties into the issue that Michael is gonna speak about. So we can speak about it then or however you wanna handle that, Michael. Let's talk about that one now. Let's do the other one, yeah. So the one that I did mention was the ad travel allocation fund for 2021. Yeah. So we'd given a short update in the past that we'd taken to the board, they'd passed it on to the Audit and Finance Committee to discuss the discussion concluded. And so I updated the issue that the fund's been restored in the budget to the 60K and it's also being renamed in the budget to be a community fund. We've never spent the full amount in terms of travel and the ideas that, or the expectation is that it'll be used for things in travel but also for other things. And it's now up to the CPC to propose what those things might be and the governance around how the funding would be, how would we would review requests to use that funds? How do we approve them? The same way we have a good process for travel in terms of how do people apply? How do we approve it? And then how do they actually get paid? Yeah, that's, I love this idea. I like converting it from a travel fund to a community fund. How do we propose we kind of workshop this out? Should we spin off a different session? Should we try to spend a little time at the end of the meeting? What do we wanna do? I think this is important and something we should get some work done on. I mean, for starters, if we wanted to, we could just come back to it at the end of our agenda but I'm open to other ideas if we want to. Well, the team put together a draft proposal, Brian. I don't know how you want to share that the best way but we have some mud on the wall. So to speak on some ideas. Yeah. I'm trying to find it, one of the thousand of open tabs I've got here so I can share it. Can you just share the screen if it's something we have time to do? Yeah. Well, I gotta find it first. Well, why don't you look for it, Brian? Why don't we just come back to this after we get through the agenda and then we'll, we can see how much time we have to dig into it a little further and Brian can share what you all have, the spaghetti you have on the wall. That's good. All right, cool. Great. So updating voting member term info, looks like it's the next agenda item if I didn't skip anything because sometimes I do. This was opened two weeks ago per 745 which is the members election. This is a poll request. Joy, did you open this any? Yeah. So this just came out of acknowledging a gap that Emily actually identified where we missed, we forgot to open the election for voting CPC members and we wanted to make it clear in the language that if we did that, that the current person serving those roles would just continue to serve those roles until such time the election changed. So I added some language and thanks Emily for catching that potential gap. So that's all that's about. Okay, so that's pretty straightforward. I put my thumb on there, looks good to me. And we got a lot of approvals. It's been open for 14 days. So this is probably even something we can just land if we think it's good, is that right? Land it. Land it. All right, I'm squashing and merging. So that's what I do. Cool, that's done. Thank you, Joy and folks for working on that. I appreciate it. Great. One just thought, I'll kind of throw out there and I think we kind of always mentioned this at different times, but do we have like any sort of reminders set up for these different points in time that we need to be doing things like elections? Do we have anything on the calendar? Should we set up a GitHub action that's just on some sort of cron that fires off an issue with a label? As I mentioned in the Comcom meeting to Joe, I'm happy to work on that. I have some other more pressing Comcom work to be doing, but I'm happy to work on that here soon. That exact GitHub actions thing is what I suggested there. Awesome, awesome. Would you do me a favor, Tierney, and just take a quick moment and maybe create an issue for it just so we come back to it or something? What do you think? It's not something that I do under this. I wouldn't do it under OpenJS, I'd be doing it under the PKGJS stuff. I'd prefer to centralize that into one space rather than doing it in all of the spaces that it would apply to. But yeah, I'm happy to create an issue in the package maintenance repo, if that makes sense. I'm just thinking about for our tracking, not specific to the work that you're doing, but just like, hey, we should have an issue or we should have something in place that helps us to not lose track of these things. I'll follow one, Joe. Great, I mean, yeah, I think that's a good point. I can drop these on the public calendar as well. To your point, that would be a good way to track it as well, Joe. Yeah, yeah, definitely. I think... That is also how we've done it in Node and we have also ended up missing those, so yeah. Yeah, it's a little bit of something, but I think definitely having a GitHub action or something that would create an issue would be super ideal, it gets right on our radar. Excellent, thank you, everybody. Cool, so moving on, this is the nominations open for voting members chosen by regular members. This has been open for two weeks. It seems that Michael is maybe the one person that has publicly commented that they would run again. Let me look at the wording here. So is the direction here that they would comment in this issue or...? E-mail you. I may have mistaken that, I thought it was a comment there, but sorry if I did the wrong thing. No, that's all right, that's all right. So when and when does this close? Nope, okay. Sorry, does anybody know when this closes? I think it's today. Okay, because it's supposed to be open for a week if I remember right. We have, because we messed up earlier last year, we ended up doing a whole thing where there's a whole structure for this. So look it up in there, but I recall it being a week. Okay, if it was a week, then we're long past it being closed, is that accurate? Or maybe it's two weeks and we're now at it. Okay, I mean, should we call it closed? The nomination period will be open for two weeks in the issue. Okay, and so do we want to be particular and say till the end of the day or do we wanna just close it now and talk about it? I can say that I have two people that have, Michael commented here publicly and someone else contacted me directly. I think that that's all that I've seen in terms of activity on this. I would personally give it till the end of the day since it's exactly 14 days ago it was open. So just to be, I would like to go past the time. Yeah, and that's good too. I can go through and make sure I'm not missing any emails or anything, but I'm pretty sure it's, I just have two people, one additional to Michael. So, all right, great. So this is, notice this is ending at the end of the day. Somebody is interested and hasn't reached out to me or commented publicly, please do so. And we can talk about it soon. Toby? There are one or two seats for this one. One for the CPC. Two? Two, currently held by Michael and Emily. Cool. Yep, cool. All right, well, that's that. We will move on and I'll try to remember to post something to that issue tomorrow. Great, Slack moderators. I know Jory has mentioned this earlier. This is issue 747. We're looking for volunteers to help be moderators on Slack. Or is this, so is this, I always get this confused. I would say it's more than a moderator. Think about it as you're the host in the MC of your own channel for the time period that you would love to sign up. Yeah, I find the term moderator confusing because I always get confused as to whether it's like a COC, you know. Yeah, I think maybe it's worth possibly either editing the issue to clarify. There's actually two asks here. Like one is that longer range of availability to help in an ongoing capacity for the rest of the year help foster a healthy community in our Slack. And the second ask is more timely, which is being that MC as Robin said to these channels specifically on OpenJS world for helping to foster great discussion and help with like the Q and A sessions and that kind of thing if you are available during those time periods. So those are the, they're different asks you can do both. I see Emily has a hand up. Just about the previous thing, Joe I think you missed the other one because we've got two elections, both for two people, both in the same scheduling. You said one of them you had two candidates for. Do you, what do you have for the other one? That's a good, see, I mentioned earlier that I have a habit of skipping agenda items. So let's get back to the moderator's thing really quickly and in a moment and look at this one. Sorry for skipping this. This is issue 751. This is nominations open for non-impact voting CPC member election. Currently it is Toby and Chris Hiller. Chris mentions he will not be running, you know, re-nominating and I think the process is the same here to reach out to me. Is that correct? Trying to scan this really quickly. That is at least my understanding from reading what was written there. Okay. Yeah, if I don't know if I have anybody having reached out to me on this. Well, you got at least me. You? Okay. You volunteered for, yeah. Yeah, so we have two elections open and I'm mixing them up from memory. Okay. I volunteered for both. That's why I'm choosing me. Okay. All right, so that's out there. Does that mean Emily gets two votes if he gets elected for both? I think I'm setting us up for an interesting discussion on that. Yeah, anyway, just you. Did you really get Emily started on a topic like this? Yeah. All right, let's clear our other business. I would love to do this again if we actually did it better than what we did last year. I feel like we failed, well, I feel like I personally failed it to be a good conduit of smaller projects and I have a relationship with them. So if we were a bit supported to organize something and if Emily was interested in doing that, I would really want to do it. If it's just to do it as I did it last year, I don't feel like I'm doing a good enough job to do it again. That's fair. And this one is also, if I remember right, two, or is it just one that? I think it's two again, two for each of those elections. It was Chris and myself, Esther. Yeah. Yeah. So I mean, I think it would make sense. I like what you're saying, Toby, and I would love to make these roles more productive for lack of a better term. Is that something that we can help the two people who are elected build that out further? Or do you think that's something that the CPC as a whole should, you know, how should we go about doing more there and fleshing it out further? I mean, essentially, I think what I'm suggesting there is if Emily's interested to do more, I'm happy to join him in doing more in that space. And we can sort of like try to figure it out and like ask for help. And so that's kind of like, essentially my ask is if Emily, if you want to do the second, like the at-launch projects, I would like to do it with someone was the, you know, was the idea of like really built, I don't know, building maybe like office hours or like something where we create a stronger relationship with like the smaller projects. That's essentially, I'm looking to get involved with this for like a partnership to do something better than what we did. I'm happy to help there too. Go ahead, Emily. That does sound like a really good idea. I mean, I'm standing here in part because I am one of the small project maintainers here that we've got. And I would be very interested in finding ways to, first of all, network in some way with the others who are in a similar role and to get a wider understanding of what if any issues they might have that the foundation might be able to help them with and vice versa. But I don't have an idea yet of exactly how to make that happen. Some of the discussions in the tech direction stuff that we've been going through recently have prompted some interesting topics too, to also pursue there. But yeah, I mean, I was very happy for the last year to be representing the non-voting members effectively, the regular members, because that kind of is easier because these people are semi-defining themselves to be active participants in the activities of the foundation, whereas the maintainers of large projects in general are not. Some of us are, but many are not. And it does mean that the position, I think, would benefit from having more outreach happening there. And it would be, if anything, an interesting challenge to try to build on the current situation. Yeah, you have the benefit of the birds too, talking in your ear and giving you advice. So that's interesting. I think I like this idea. I think even maybe if we just threw something on the calendar every other week to kind of work on this more, it could be an open meeting, open hours for non-impact maintainers and members to join and talk about things, but also could be a time just set aside if nobody does do that for the three of us or whoever wants to get involved to work on supporting the projects more and engaging with them more and such. That sounds better than not doing anything. So I'm excited about that. Great. Would you do me a favor, Toby, and throw something in an issue? So like maybe something on the calendar or however we want to approach it just to kind of have something tracked. It does raise the question though. I mean, if emailing gets elected for both of these things, is that cool? Is that, how does that work? Is that- I'm very happy to stand out. This is one of the reasons I asked earlier whether we're doing the elections in parallel or sequentially because previously we have never had this issue of possibly selecting a person for two things at the same time. I'm very happy to stand down if anyone else would effectively be interested in the role or one of the roles here. And on the other hand, I would be also very happy for us to use this as a test case to see what should we do with absolutely no expectation on my part of getting any benefit of it myself as if we've like almost ever even built it on anything. All right, cool, cool. Well, let's just, you know, let's we'll figure it out I guess as we go. I don't know. That's what we'll do. One thing I was going to suggest just process wise, like Toby, if you're going to run for the other position it's probably good if you just sent Joe an email saying, hey, I'm gonna do that. That way we don't have to figure out what we do if we, you know, you want to volunteer afterwards. Yeah, thank you, Michaels. All right, awesome. And I'll dig through. And again, another instance of if you have an interest in either of these two open roles, please shoot me an email, josepijoesepi at ibm.com. And we'll move forward on both of these issues and we'll figure it out as we go. Great, thank you. Back to issue 747, the Slack moderators, I would ask maybe Jory if you can clarify the description on the kind of two aspects of the ask here. Regardless, I'm happy to help on both of them, but it would probably be helpful. Anything else that we want to talk about on this issue or highlight or promote or encourage or anything? Just. No, just especially if you're interested in helping, you know, with the event. And also if you're interested in helping kind of make it a, the Slack work space more useful to people and, and you know, all that I'd love for you to get involved. And I would add one thing that for the event we're having Slack or booking Slack engagement opportunities and multiple time zones. So you can do it at the time zone that works best for you during your day. Cool. All right, well, we've got another meeting or two before the event, I'm not sure. So we can leave this on the agenda and check back on it as well. Cool. Oh, look, is this another election? Am I, am I crazy? Oh, no, so this is voting CPC members election. Maybe this is the one that spawned the other two issues. Is that correct? That's correct. And we've, we've, I think started to resolve two of the three and actually we've started to resolve all three of them. There was three points. One is we got to run the election. Two is the language clarification which we just learned about PR. And three is tracking these events moving forward either via an action or a calendar. So I think this one we can probably close because we have things to resolve the three kind of pieces that we have right here. All right. So closing this issue as we have other issues needed to address the items here. Great. Excellent. And then the last one, Brian, do you have any update on DCOCLA? This is issue 632. No, I will reach up to maintain her again. Okay, no problem. I actually, when you joined us like, oh, maybe that, maybe there's something there. No pressure. No, I don't need to guilt you or anything, but it just, I was reminded of this issue. Yep, absolutely. I got you. Cool, cool, cool. On a related note, I realized earlier that message format is still using the JS foundation CLA. Do we have steps somewhere they've told about how, how should one switch from the JS foundation CLA to the open JS foundation CLA? So Emily, we can do that pretty easily. There are some steps that I haven't written down for open JS, but which have worked in other communities. And it's basically a few, there are a few parts of the process. Most of it's actually documentation and preparing people for it. I am probably looking pretty open later on this week. Maybe you and I can find some time to sit down and just go through it. The most important. Yeah, the most important part of that is for the core maintainers, we try and get them onboarded initially before we turn anything on so that it doesn't interrupt their workflow. And that's kind of the main thing I wanna make sure we get that here. Cool, opinion and slack, does that work? That works great, thank you. Cool, so moving on, there's one more item on the agenda. This is the NBM charter review. This has been open for a couple of weeks. I know we've got a few thumbs, several thumbs and rockets and I don't know what you call that thing. Confetti horn. Ta-da. Ta-da, yeah, but do you call it a ta-da? I thought, anyway. I think so. Party popper. Yeah, there you go, party popper. I like that. Jordan, do you want to comment here and just kind of update us on where you feel like we are in terms of people's comments? I know we've got a lot of approvals, but what do you think? Where are we at? On the NBM charter? Yeah, I mean, it seems okay. Like every comment that has been made, I've addressed the feedback as far as I can tell. So if someone disagrees, of course, I'm more than happy to fix it, but I don't want to accidentally rush past any feedback, but it seems good. Yeah, scrolling through it looks good. Yeah, we've got Toby and Emily on the call and Sarah, well, Sarah gave an LGTM too. So I don't know, I guess Toby, Emily, looks like you guys are all on board as well, you folks. I think I added a spaceship, a rocket, whatever. Oh, nice. I should have looked up. I think. Yeah, all the emoji reactions are good and everything somebody's asked to fix has been fixed as far as I can tell. Cool, well, that's exciting, right? I mean, this is near the end for incubating NBM. Is that correct? It's the final item. So I think it is the end. Is there, correct me if I'm wrong, is the final item, the PR that actually moves it from the read me to like the at large? I feel like that was sort of the like. Yes. Yeah. Okay, so I can close the charter review issue and then I'll make that PR go from there. That's perfect. Thanks, everybody. Yeah, thank you. Thank you. Cool. So we've got, if we're gonna close out 10 minutes early to do some private business, we've got about 13 minutes to get back to the community fun stuff. I see Brian just shared something. Let me look at this because I could share my screen if we want. Does that make sense? Sure. Okay, I'll do that, why not? I really quickly put together a proposal template. So bear in mind that it's really quick. The main thing you wanna look at would be in this PR that I just dropped in the chat, community fun process. It's marked down file in the same directory. And that actually has the details. Oh, was it the draft proposal? Is that what you're talking about? That's it. Okay. All right, it worked. So let me just maybe walk through the basics of this. The goal of this was to put together, well, the goal of this is to separate the actual process, like the logistics of how people request funding and how they get paid from the process of deciding that. And so one of the requests that came from the board was that the CPC put together some proposals here and really be able to articulate what exactly is this going to be used for? And the reason I bring this up is I say that's specifically excluded from the scope of what I'm doing here. This is just how do we get from point A to point B as efficiently as possible once the CPC has decided to use the funding for something and when somebody's ready to start applying. Now, a couple of things to bear in mind here. Again, many of these things in here are being taken from the process which we were using back when it was the node travel fund. It does involve having things tracked on GitHub in the public, particularly the decision making process but did make a few tweaks that just based upon past experience in places where we had to hang up some confusions where I think it may make things a little bit easier. One of the key things is recommending that we have a separate repo to be able to track these approvals given that it doesn't really cost us to have an extra repo. This also allows us to have dedicated issues and issue templates for people to be able to approve or to request being a part of the community travel fund and it just kind of cleans up things and makes it less likely that things are going to get lost. One of the other things that's changed from this we had a lot of administrative issues with the markdown file getting really big and gnarly with a bunch of PRs against it. The idea here is that we're going to at least in this proposal was trying to simplify that down so that we don't have a bunch of cooks in the kitchen and end up with merge conflicts and data getting lost. So there are a lot of little things like this where they are just tweaks on the old process but hopefully we'll just make it a little easier to know where we are and where we've come from. As far as the actual payments process goes, one of the other big changes since the last time is that we now have a tool that allows us to really efficiently get payments out to people. It also keeps a public ledger so we know exactly how much has been spent and who it's gone to. It's one of the LFX tools. We're using it in other projects and it seems like it would be a port over well to this particular process. So at this point, I'm sorry, I was just gonna close up. Robin, Jory, Rachel and I have put eyes on this and it hopefully is ready for your review. So I was gonna ask if you wanted me to interrupt with questions if you wanted me to wait so thank you for answering that without me having to ask it. Public ledger, is this blockchain stuff? No, no, it's LFX Community Bridge, or sorry, LFX crowdfunding tool, which there's a website that you can go to that says here's exactly who has been paid and when. So we're not putting it on the blockchain just yet. Okay. I was asking this jokingly in the chat. I can't believe you asked this seriously, this is awesome. Ironically though, they will be paid with Dogecoin. So yeah, that's my one question. How do people get reimbursed? Like how does the money actually get sent to them? Is it? Yeah, so it's pretty straightforward. So basically, I'll describe it from the tops down here. So at the beginning of the process, the CPC says or somebody applies for a fund of some sort. CPC says, okay, the person does the thing they apply for reimbursement. At that point, I or somebody else would get a notification that they've applied for reimbursement through the LFX site. Whoever it is, in this case, probably me who is administering this would then go check and just make sure is this the person that we're expecting who the CPC approved and is the amount correct. So this is the same thing I did before. Once that goes through, then the person submits their forms. If they're a US resident, they have to submit a W-9. If they are an international person, then they would have to submit a wire transfer form. And then it just goes through our normal reimbursement process. Is there any options other than wire transfer? So if you are, this is kind of getting down into the weeds on the logistics. But if you're domestic in the US or in a certain number of other countries, it can be done through ACH. Otherwise, if you're international, it's wire transfer. So I just know that like wire transfers very expensive for people. Yeah, and so there are certain things that we can do here. It should be expensive for them to receive a wire transfer, right? I got one from the foundation and I know it was like $40 or something like that. Yeah, sometimes that does happen. For the foundation, it's kind of for you. No, for me. Like basically it was, I got a $40 charge in my bank account. And that's why I'm asking, because I know that that's one thing with the existing thing we could improve. It's fairly common. Yeah, unfortunately it is. Maybe not. Yeah, and this is one of these things where we can address this by grossing up the amount that we budget for people. So for example, if there's, if somebody's getting 50 bucks and their bank takes a $40 cut out of it. Yeah, it's kind of nice. Exactly. So yeah, so and this is something we could just do administratively and say we will cover the wire transfer fees. It just means you gotta budget it in, but it's something which has come up in other contexts as well. Trini, do you have your hand up still or is that? I know that's from before my bed. Okay, no worries. Is there, oh, I have to figure out how to put my hand up. Is there a hand? Oh, I see that on my website. So your audio is also real choppy. Is that? Oh no, okay. That's probably not helping me. I'm not helping. Intuitively. Okay, how about if I could just look at my phone? Same. Terrible. Okay, not better. Not better. You might want to rejoin? Not better. Yeah, no. Okay. I wanna talk about my question in Jeff. I do wanna point out, Brian, that I really like your pragmatic suggesting to dealing with bank transfer cost issues. I really like that. This is a common problem that I'm being not a US citizen. I see all the time and it's good to have good solutions for this. Agreed. Sarah's question is, would it be possible for the foundation to spend the money on behalf of the person in some cases? So, Sarah, that's a really good question. And there are some nuances here with the way that this works. The process as it's proposed here is reimbursement based. And that basically, there are a couple of limitations for a reimbursement based process. So for one, somebody needs to make the initial payment or somebody needs to, if somebody, for example, is going to be traveling, they would make the initial payment themselves for the ticket and then get reimbursed for it. And this is consistent with the way that the No Travel Fund has originally run. We didn't book things on people's behalf. Now, if there are an exceptional circumstance, like, I'm trying to think of an example of this, if there were something which was... I mean, I can give you an example from Node where we had people who wanted to participate and come over from Africa and we had the funds but they weren't able to front the money themselves. And that specific situation has happened multiple times where other project members just ended up fronting it for them and then getting reimbursed for them. Yeah, and thank you, Tierney. That's a good example. And that is the way that this process would work is that somebody with a credit card needs to make the initial payment to get reimbursed. You also, at that point, one of the reasons which we have shied away from this in the past is that if somebody doesn't travel, for example, if I were to pay for somebody's ticket and then they didn't travel, I would be on the hook for it. And the idea here is that in the past, the policy has been if somebody doesn't travel and they don't get reimbursed. So we want to avoid frivolous, somebody else paid for my ticket but I woke up feeling on the wrong side of the beds, not gonna go. That's the situation which we're trying to solve against. Although that, of course, does... It's challenging to apply that completely across the board because there are always going to be exceptional cases. I think if that were to come up, then we can look into other ways to address it. But by and large, we found that the most successful policies have been in such a way that the original person who's requesting it does have something, some sort of an involved interest, whether they've paid it, they have to actually travel in order to get reimbursed or whatever the case may be. Yeah, that's interesting. I guess you can probably see how that can be exclusive rather than inclusive. And I think that that's something that the projects in the Foundation probably care about. And I'd like to see if at least in the future we can potentially try to solve for this rather than putting others at risk to include marginalized and minoritized folks. Yeah, and it's certainly something that I think we could look at on a case-by-case basis. It's certainly, if there were an exceptional case, then I think we could probably figure something out. Yeah, I'm even thinking in scholarship perspectives if we wanted to do something, for example, on certifications. It's just maybe a pool and a ticket and a coupon that we can issue, but then the funding would happen on the backend, right? Yeah, yeah. Toby, how's their hand up? Yeah, I also want to channel Sarah who's saying similar things to what I wanted to say in the chat because her headphones are going wonky, I assume. Do we actually have a history of existing abuse of funds like this at the Foundation? Because I understand sort of doing defensive design around this, but when we do defensive design like this, as Tyranny pointed out, we actually do exclude people. And I know that we can then have sort of deal with special cases, that makes sense, but then actually knowing that you can be as special cases, daring to stand up to be a special case is another way of excluding people. So I'm always concerned when we start off by thinking that people will do the wrong thing rather than the right thing. And I'm feeling that that's kind of what we're doing here. I definitely understand it. And we have in the past had this situation. So it's definitely come up in the past. And I mean, you never want to be the one who has to deliver the message of, well, you didn't comment, you don't have a valid reason. So you need to reimburse us for the ticket or you need to pay for the ticket yourself, but we have had to deliver that message in the past. All right, let's put some more thought into this aspect. I think it's really important and maybe come back to it next time and talk about it some more. The attorney's got a comment in the chat that something similar has happened in the past with mode. But we do need to jump to private business and Joy's got a drop as well. And I agree with your comment there, Toby. So I'm gonna stop sharing and let's call it a wrap to the live public meeting. Thanks everybody for joining. Please join again.