General Assembly Transcript — September 17, 2026

Daniel T: Okay. So it is six past eight, so let's get started. Welcome everybody to the first general assembly, which is focused on one agenda point, which is the event dates vote, which you've all heard far too much about over the last month and a half, I'm sure. So you're probably all looking forward to not hearing me talk about event dates at every community call. So I thought it would be worth starting with a little bit of a procedural cleaning, a tidying up. There are some ways that this GA is not quite exactly fitting the statutes and the law and so on, and it's important that we discover those, and we fix them. For this general assembly, even if there's some ways that it isn't quite fitting the official laws, because the board has committed to following the results of the vote, it doesn't really matter. However, when later we do things like statute changes and elections and so on, we definitely don't want to create a situation where somebody could say, "Wait a minute, this statute change is not valid because the procedure wasn't followed," or, "This person is not actually a board member because the procedure wasn't followed." So we want to make sure we do this well for those kind of serious matters. Peter will probably add a few points to what I'm about to list, because he found a number of those issues when he came back from Burning Man. But for example, one of the things that's supposed to be the case for a GA is that you can vote until the vote is closed, and you can change your vote until the vote is closed. Now, the way I designed the system, once you click submit to the vote, it gets submitted and disconnected from your profile, so therefore you can't edit it, and you can't change it. And that obviously diminishes somewhat the purpose of the general assembly meeting itself. And so it makes sense that the votes should still be changeable until the general assembly has happened. Another thing that Peter found was that the law, I think, requires us that once the vote is open, the list of people who can vote is fixed and cannot change afterwards. Given that, when I was opening a vote, about half the board was not actually listed as asociados in the system. I think it's good that we're a little bit more flexible on this one, and we did manage to add a few more people over the last few days. But obviously for an election or a statute change, we need to make sure that we follow this properly and to the letter. What else am I missing, Peter? Probably a whole bunch of things.

Peter D: Yeah, those were the big ones. And so as a side note, I made a governance-specific voting thing that we're just not using for this one yet. The biggest other thing it does is allow for -- it doesn't let anybody see what the results are until the vote is done. But it does show people stats as far as how many people have voted. That's just a nice-to-have so we can see if we've hit quorum and things like that, so far. And then it also has a bit of an audit log, so we can actually see -- or we won't see, we'll have the choice to see who voted for what, but that's a decision we can make on a vote-by-vote basis. I don't know what specifically the law says for that. But then just for proper auditing and history, for checking the right boxes, we can see that the system will keep track of if somebody changed their vote, so that both they themselves can see that they voted A and then changed it to B or the other way around. So if there's ever any questions around who did what when, we would know those things, and have them in the system, where the current one is kind of a fixed vote that's just based off the survey system, and surveys usually aren't changeable. So that's how that went. But yeah, the new bits are kind of tied specifically into the governance part of Humans, which is separate from surveys. And that also understands the asociado bit and all those other bits, so.

Daniel T: Yeah, that was it. Oh, there was one more procedural thing that I thought of, which was that in terms of the announcement -- we announced this, we've been talking about these event dates for a month and a half. We've posted about them on the website multiple times. We posted multiple emails talking about a general assembly on the seventeenth. There's been board minutes going back to just right after the event, or a few weeks after the event finished, talking about this. So there is a fair amount of announcement of this general assembly, but I think when we do the next general assembly, we want to make sure that we follow the formal announcement procedures even better. So there is a very clear -- here's the formal announcement of the general assembly, emails to all the asociados at the right timeline, much more clearly and formally done. So that would be another thing.

Peter D: Oh, yeah. So I think the governance voting part is set to a two-week schedule with a reminder the day before if you haven't voted as well. So you'll get a little email saying, "You haven't voted yet. Come vote quickly before the thing happens." And then also during the meeting itself, we can actually hit the stop button, which is effectively -- we're in the meeting now, we're deciding it's done -- whereas the survey, I don't know what you put in for that, but... For this time, but...

Daniel T: Yeah. So we'll have all that tightened up. Victor, on your question -- it's not that no new asociados can be accepted during the timeframe, it's that they can't vote on the vote that's already been announced, I think. Once we set up the vote and we open it, then everybody who's an asociado at that point is able to vote, and everybody who's not yet an asociado cannot vote on that one. So they need to be accepted before the vote opens. That's my understanding of it.

Peter D: And the other rub to that technicality is it goes both ways. If somebody was to be leaving the association during a vote, their vote would still count. So that is bi-directional. It's a fixed list once the vote opens. At least as far as my understanding of the laws, and I'm happy to be corrected if anybody knows better.

Daniel T: And since we probably have some organizational geeks listening to this right now, or who are gonna listen to the recording, if you can think of other ways that we've messed this up, please tell us -- things that we could improve there, because we definitely want to make sure that when we do a statute change or a board election, we don't do it in a way that causes, for example, the future board member to feel like their role is not quite steady because there's a procedural issue with how they've been elected. We want to make sure that's really, really solid. So if anybody's gonna comment now, would welcome that. Or if you have at any point in the future comments about, "Oh, actually you guys should have done this differently," please speak up. It's much better to have two thousand pairs of eyes on this than a few. I guess there are no procedural comments right now.

Peter D: To Victor's point, the answer is if you're accepted as an asociado after the vote starts, you're not on the roll for the vote going forward. So that's the rub. We can still accept them and things like that, that'll go through the normal process. But we'd want to have them in before so they can vote. It basically makes a roster at the opening of the vote, and then that roster is fixed for any subsequent association changes.

Daniel T: And that's based on the Spanish law, as I understand -- it's not in the statutes, but it's in the Spanish law.

Peter D: Our statutes are effectively a layer on top of the organic law, and I don't know the number, but that's the Spanish law.

Daniel T: So one of the tricky things with the statutes is that you might be looking in the statutes and be like, "Oh," like, you know, it just doesn't say that, or it says this and stuff. But there's also the law that the statute sits on top of, which has some things specified, that also impacts what we are supposed to do, what we're allowed to do, and that can lead to slight missed things and so on. And obviously, we're all getting better at this. Anna, to answer your question, yes, after the vote starts, not when it's announced. So we could announce an election six months from now, but it's when the vote for the election starts that the voting list is fixed. Yeah, I think the statutes don't say how long the async vote has to be open, so we could amend that as a statute change, but right now they don't say. So technically we could even do a GA without an async vote, but probably hitting quorum for that would be quite hard. So, cool. All right. So unless there are more last-minute questions -- so just to announce the timeline, I posted this update on Telegram and on WhatsApp, but the plan is that we start the call now. By twenty twenty, which is in five minutes, we should have finished talking about the procedural issues. Hopefully by nine PM or so, we are done with the discussion about the event dates vote itself. If we need to, we can keep it open until nine thirty. And at nine thirty sharp, whoever is the last person speaking at that point is the last person to speak, and hopefully they don't keep speaking for thirteen hours. Otherwise I will probably deviate and interrupt them. So at nine thirty latest, we will close the vote. At nine, if nobody has anything to add. And then we will spend up to thirty minutes discovering how the website results page looks, together. I have tested it, but not with dozens of votes, not with the full proper votes. So I guess there'll be a bit of excitement for me and Peter as well to see how well the system works. Nothing like live demos. We all know how those work.

Daniel T: Peter did post a link there. If you are an asociado and you haven't voted yet, this is a link to vote. You also have a personalized link in your inbox, but you can use this one. You just need to be logged in. Whilst the one in your inbox, you don't need to be logged in. And yeah. With that, I guess let's open the floor to anybody who wants to still comment about the event dates themselves. There is still -- the vote is still open until at least nine. There currently have been 90 votes cast, but there's still 40 votes that have not been cast. So, obviously we'll give a very clear warning before we close so that in case you have your vote not submitted, you can submit it. Does anybody want to say anything? Maybe share their excitement as this first general assembly, however flawed it might be. Daniela loves bureaucracy. She spends all day working bureaucracy. It's her favorite thing. No kink shaming. So yes, actually, if you believe you are an asociado and you have not been able to vote, this is a good place to mention that. That is also something we can look at. We've got both me and Peter. [an attendee's asociado status was checked; they were not registered as an asociado and so had not received a link.]

Peter D: It's also not automatic, right? Just because you're qualified doesn't mean you're automatically an asociado. You had to apply ahead of time.

Daniel T: Yes. So... you need... And department head lead for a camp. I'm not sure what that means. That really depends on the camp. The criteria as per the website are: if you've been a lead of an event, in a similar event, or a lead or a meta lead, one of those kind of core contributors, or you've been active outside the event for more than three months, or if you've been a camp lead. And obviously the camp lead thing also has a bit of a kind of blurriness to it. Our general thumb rule would be that there should not be much more than -- what was your thumb rule like, Peter? Like five per hundred or something?

Peter D: Five percent. Five percent, yeah.

Daniel T: Or five percent of the camp. Because, for example, taking the garden as an example, we have a lot of people who have the title "lead." Not all of them are core contributors that should be asociados. Andrew? Yeah.

Peter D: You're muted, Andrew.

Victor P: Um, yours is-

Daniel T: Still muted.

Victor P: I'm in software.

Daniel T: Yeah. Your Google Meet is muted there. So I'm sorry.

Andrew S: Ah. Is that working?

Daniel T: There you go. Yes, it is working.

Andrew S: Okay. Thank you. I really -- I guess first of all, I'll keep it short and sweet 'cause I'm sure other people have maybe things to say. But really, it was an amazing event, the transition from last year to this year. So for anyone who doesn't know, I run Shh!. I set Shh! up. Been running it forever, basically. So it was really sweet to see the event happen this year and the transition, and I know a lot of work has been going on behind the scenes, and I was speaking to people early in the year. So a massive, massive thank you, and I'm sure there's been various burnouts, but it is appreciated. I really wanted to say that because I know it's a lot. And then the whole kind of tech design, the website, the whole new system -- really, really, it's beautiful. So that was my first bit, just to say that. And then mainly the main thing I want to say, in terms of maybe for those who haven't voted yet, is: you know, I've been coming to Nowhere since 2009, and I set Shh! up in 2010. And those first few years, it was always hot, and that was part of the deal. That's part of what Nowhere was, and I was initially afraid of the heat. But even for myself, the last few years, it's just been too much, and I've even questioned for myself if it's even good for my health to keep on doing this with this intensity. And I know ultimately it's about the fire restrictions and not being able to cook, not being able to burn gas, and that was a big issue, I'm sure, for everyone -- just not being able to cook and various other things. But in terms of the dates, my strong -- what I would love to see is essentially one month earlier, sort of like first week of June, end of May, first week of June, as a kind of almost kick start for the summer. Because the other possible scenario is later in the summer, if we try to avoid the heat, the fire zone, but then we kind of become the hangover after Burning Man, after everything else, the thing that happens at the end of September. So for me, early June, first week of June, a clear month -- it's gonna make a difference in the heat. And I know people have said it's during term time, and maybe some people who are studying won't be able to come. But that said, the person I created my Barrio Shh!way with, she could never return because she got a teaching job. So first week of July is actually for a lot of people still term time. So for me, the argument -- I understand it, but a month earlier for me feels the sweet spot. And we could have opened this summer, essentially. And actually the only last thing I would say is what I feel is really, really important is because even ten, fifteen years ago, heat was always a worry, and even for myself, and I think it's come to the point now where it's actively putting people off. And obviously the things that happened this year is actively putting people off. So just for the future of the event and its survival and growth, that's my vote -- a month earlier, first week of June from the first week of July. And just thank you again for everything that you've done, and I appreciate that you've got this process and this vote started so quickly so that we can all settle on whatever the new date is and make that happen. So thank you all.

Daniel T: Thank you, Andrew. I could respond something, but I feel like everybody's heard me talk about event dates enough, and nobody wants to hear me say more stuff about this. Would anybody else like to share some points about the event dates fate? Yep. Jonathan.

Jonathan C: Muting. I just wanted to say that when I was looking at the dates -- by the way, I really appreciate the breakdown, the simple graphic, that shows the main risk. I can second what Andrew said. I also have my personal preference. I like the physical challenge of the environment. I think it brings out a certain type of person. It forces us to be creative in certain ways, and that's my personal preference. But I also have in mind that this is something that makes it impossible for a lot of people, so it becomes an accessibility issue as well. And in general, it could be awesome to have a hot burn, another forty-five-degree-in-the-shade year. But if we get canceled and have to leave site, and then somebody has to actually strike that eventually, I don't want to put those people in that situation. I'm coming in from Germany. I won't be able to do that. So when I was considering my vote, I weighed that in more than my personal preference of, well, what would I like the experience to be? My preference was to ensure that first of all that there is an experience, which isn't sitting in Sariñena in a makeshift Airbnb or something like that, or moving to Zaragoza, as much as I love Zaragoza. So I just wanted to put that in perspective that different people will value different things. I think it's completely valid to vote along the line of, well, we should have the spirit of the burn, and the spirit of the burn is the heat, so I vote for the heat. I think that's completely valid. I just wanted to state my position that I tried to create a mix of these priorities when I selected the dates that I voted for.

Daniel T: Thank you, Jonathan. We are currently at 93 votes, just so you know. Which is 72% participation rate at this point. Yeah, Condor.

Condor: Hi. I'm not gonna repeat myself from what I said -- when was it, two weeks ago -- when I was kind of pushing a bit for the argument of September, because, you know -- I'll mention it super briefly, but I have another point. Because, you know, if I wasn't going to any other burns, yeah, June, start of the summer, would kind of make sense to me. But I've been pretty heavily into Borderland and Burning Man at different points, and both of those are just admin-heavy burns, and they eat up the spring, and I know so many people who are going specifically to Borderland. I live in a burner-heavy city where everyone's going to Borderland, no one's going to Nowhere, and it's like the heat, and it's like the two-at-once thing. So I could totally see a lot of people doing their spring burn planning for something else, and then a little bit of Nowhere planning during the spring, and then you go to Borderland, Burning Man, you do your half, and you've got a month and a half to do the final heavy push before Nowhere. And I could really see a lot of groups doing both. So, and I think that's good for growth. But, anyway, that's just me. But I guess a point I wanted to make is a lot of us are kind of invested heavily into one idea or another, and at the end of the vote, some of us maybe won't even be able to go. And I think it's maybe really important that we both embrace whatever date we end up on, have empathy for the ones who won't be able to go to the event, which kind of sucks, but it is what it is. So let's just, once we've voted, put our differences behind us and pull in the same direction and have a bit of empathy for the people it doesn't work out for. But let's hope that it brings us together and gives us a new start. And I think whatever we end up with, it's not gonna be as bad as forty-five degrees in the middle of cancellation season. So we're gonna end up better somehow. So thanks for all the good work, because I think whatever we get, we've got a good result.

Daniel T: And actually, just while we're waiting for the next speaker, talking about good work, I really want to give a huge thanks to Céline and Olivier (Ankhor) and Peter K for helping put this together in the middle of the summer, when most people have better things to do than having meetings about governance and procedures and votes and gathering data and making tables and stuff like that. So thank you so much. It wouldn't have happened without you helping. It's been -- as much as I am crazy, I just couldn't have done this myself. So thank you so much for helping.

Condor: I think you muted yourself.

Daniel T: Yeah. Does anybody else want to add something? We still have half an hour at least. So looking at the question from Erin, there is -- I think that somebody posted a survey about, from Nowhere, about reasons why people didn't or wouldn't attend Nowhere. It was posted on the Discord. I don't have the link handy. And it seemed, in my mind, it seemed to result in a number of possible changes that would need to happen that would be worth pursuing, some of which are being pursued, like the sound policy, for example. In this particular decision we're focusing on the event dates for the wildfire risk. Yeah, that's the only one I'm aware of.

Peter D: And there was a lot of chat on the side too, with people who have told, at least, me that they've lost people over the years to the heat, so that they potentially have other people that would come back if it was at a less hostile time. But at the same time, any other date we're gonna pick is going to conflict with some portion of our audience. So it's kind of a gamble at some level, to pick a date that potentially -- and I'm making up numbers here completely -- loses ten percent of the audience, but maybe brings in thirty percent new people. So we end up building our community in a net stance. That net doesn't matter to the people who can't come because of other commitments or reasons. But as a community, for the longevity of things, we have to make decisions that are not super easy all the time.

Daniel T: So to answer Hannah -- the -- we will communicate the decision. Well, it's okay. No. We'll communicate the result of the vote in this call. The final decision is dependent on the INAGA response. I believe Daniela has applied to get INAGA clearance for basically all the dates, and more. And, like, until we get the go-ahead from INAGA -- and they can take anything from weeks to months to respond, and we asked them in the middle of the summer, so they might take a while, it is Spain -- until we get that final clearance, we don't know for sure which date wins. So INAGA is a bird -- what does INAGA stand for? Daniela, do you know what INAGA stands for? What are they? They're some kind of environmental agency, and it seems the birds are the main concern environmentally. There's no -- okay, right, there you go. Instituto Aragonés de Gestión Ambiental. So once we get the answer from INAGA, if they approve all the dates, then it's just whichever date won. If they remove some dates, then we will remove those dates from the vote, and then we will know the ranking at that point, which probably won't change the result if it's not the date that won, but might change the result. There was an explanation about the ranking algorithm in a previous call, and it's also on the website, so you can read up about that if you want. So the final decision will not be made public -- we don't know when the final decision will be made public, but we'll have the result of the vote on this call.

Peter D: Yeah. And I think we've kind of spoken internally -- and I don't think this is letting too much of the cat out of the bag here -- but I don't think any of us wants to be changing the date after roughly mid-November. So if we can set a date by roughly then that's public and final, approved and whatever, at least that's my preference, and I hope Daniel's not rolling his eyes too badly at me.

Daniel T: I don't have a desire to keep doing this vote over and over again for the rest of my life, no. We'll need to do another one next year, but I'd like to move on to other things.

Peter D: And that feels late enough that we should be able to get the right approvals in from the government, and early enough that people making their plans for next year aren't harping on us to pick a date. So that's kind of where it falls for me. Aaron actually asked a question a little bit ago about the finances and the growth. I think it's gonna work out to roughly seventeen hundred-ish as our break-even point this year. So we ended up a bit in the green, but that was with things cut back in some departments. So the growth is, I think, a bit about, A, hopefully bringing some younger people into the community to stabilize our aging population, as well as to fill out some of the parties -- it seemed sometimes this year there were fewer parties that were full. So that's a bit of it. And then also with growth -- the growth could be twenty-five hundred, it could be three thousand. It's not four thousand, at least not in my head. So if we can get up to numbers like that, twenty-five hundred to three thousand, somewhere in that range, ticket prices can potentially come down, art allocations can go up, low-income things can get expanded. There's a bunch more we can do to make things more accessible to more of the community, and not have me get a lot more gray hairs. So I don't know if that answers it at all, but-

Daniel T: I think it was a question from Echo actually about the financial sustainability and growth.

Peter D: I think Aaron said it first, but-

Daniel T: Maybe. I mean, I can read through the questions and answer them, but it feels like this is more meant to be a point for people to discuss things and share their perspective. But if nobody wants to share anything, I could do that. Or Peter, you can take some of those if you want.

Peter D: I'm sorry, I can't keep up with... Oh, and Paloma asked about clashing with other events. That did come up on our -- somebody did, other events reach out. I think it was Peter K.

Daniel T: Yeah, multiple of us did. And it was part of the survey as well -- can you come not just for the event, but who can come for build, for strike, and so on. And it felt like all the days that we selected for the shortlist were dates where there was a good proportion of people who could come for, who said they would come for the event, and enough people would come for build, for strike, etc. Of course it will have an impact, and it's impossible to predict -- if you ask people today, burners today, "Oh, where are you gonna be next year in June?" -- not everybody will know for sure. But there were enough people committed to coming and doing the build and strike for it to happen, based on the survey. Anna?

Anna T: Yeah. I was thinking that was actually quite surprising to me about the survey results -- that it didn't make a huge difference as to whether people could come, because the survey asked if people could come for build, for the event, for strike, and the kind of surprising thing for me was that people more or less could come for all of them if they could come. It didn't have such an impact as to whether people could come for all of those weeks. So I was thinking it could be interesting to see -- I don't know if it's easy to see the survey results right now, but that might be interesting for people.

Daniel T: Yeah, I can probably share my screen. Hold on. So you can find all these on nobodies.team, but let me share a tab here. So under Event, or the twenty twenty-seven dates, there is the availability of community, which has results -- full survey results -- and you can also download the results, the JSON. There's a JSON file with all the results. I don't know if this actually breaks down -- maybe I should look at the thing in Humans. Sorry, I'm scrolling around a bit. Maybe I will just open this in Humans, actually. So everybody can see my screen. Surveys. And it was this one. And this -- so we asked people if they could come to the event, if they could come to the event build, the barrio build, the strike, and there was a decent proportion of people, for the dates that ended up being shortlisted, who could come -- it was kind of in proportion to who could come to the event, who could then also come for event build, the barrio build, or strike. Based on this, we felt those dates were likely to be viable. And of course, nobody can know for sure -- there's obviously uncertainty in planning any kind of event like this, but it felt like the best we could do to try and figure that out. Stopping the screen share there. Benoit, what would you like to say?

Benoit: So I don't know if people are still actually voting while listening to the call, but I did want to kind of repeat what I said in chat previously, and then also-

Daniel T: We're at ninety-six, so some people are.

Benoit: Okay, good. So I just wanted to kind of officially say my point, because I think it is very important for me and for the community overall. I do also love the heat -- I'm in this camp of, the extreme is part of the experience and part of the draw. But, as Jonathan said also, we can't be risking getting canceled. So I agree with moving out of July and August. For me, late May and June is a bad choice. I know a lot of people do prefer it, but for me, I think it's really important for our long-term growth that we are not trying to go head to head with other European burns. And to me, head to head doesn't just mean it's in the same week -- I mean, really, a lot of us cannot do multiple burns even within a month. We have family, we have limited vacation. Just doing, say, the last week of May, and then trying to do the last week of June like Kiez Burn, or mid-June for Where the Sheep Sleep -- any of these things really lock out the people who have other responsibilities and can't just take a bunch of time. And I think it's important for us to be part of the broader European burn community and not be competing. I will come no matter when the date is -- this is my home. But I think it's important to also grow the community by making it available to people who otherwise wouldn't or can't come, because of other burns that are their home burn. So for me, if we're going to take it out of July and August, then September is really the only viable choice, from still having some kind of heat, but making it possible for others to join from the burn community.

Daniel T: Thank you, Benoit. On the other burns, Victor, since you mentioned this -- the longest response we got was from Burning Nest, because one of the dates we were looking at was pretty close to them, and there's a lot of overlap between Nest and Nowhere. And they said they cannot move their dates, but they're also very understanding. They said, "Well, we'll just have to deal with whatever your community decides. And yes, it will have an impact if you move closer to us." And that -- we understand why you're needing to change this, and we appreciate that you have a process for this, and it makes sense. And obviously they don't want us to move closer to them, but they understand that we might, and they're not gonna move because they're tied to a specific site and date and bank holiday and things like that. Does anybody else want to say something about the event dates vote? Paloma.

Paloma Z: Hi. Yes, I want to know why on the vote -- I cannot recheck it again -- wasn't the option to vote for, to choose, the last week of June or the very first week of July. Is there a reason why?

Daniel T: Yeah. So, after community consultation on this, we decided to have a model where the board would select a shortlist of dates that felt viable, and then the community would vote between those. And we decided -- it was not clear exactly how many we would have, but in the end it ended up being eight dates, including the current date. So then we picked three dates earlier and four dates later.

Paloma Z: No, the reasoning for that -- sorry for interrupting you -- is because in 2023 and 2024, we had the start of the event bang on, I think it was the first of July, in 2024 or something like that. I cannot remember very well. But that had a massive impact on the weather. [inaudible], and we didn't have any red alert calls because of that. Because it was slightly earlier, but it wasn't so early that it would clash with other people wanting to go to other events, or crew not being able to come to set up, because the setup for Nowhere has always been three weeks, and things like that. That's why I meant -- I was a bit surprised that there wasn't an option to vote for those later weeks in June or earlier in July.

Daniel T: Yeah. So, part of the reason -- if you look at this chart with the daily alert levels, they have changed quite a lot over the years. And, as a board, we felt that these two were not any more viable than this one, basically. Because the event would have been canceled this year if it had been on either of these weeks, basically.

Paloma Z: That answers my question. Thank you.

Daniel T: Welcome.

Joël: Also, I do want to really be grateful for the amount of information you put on the website and the sheets. That was very, very useful.

Tancredi T: What's the track here, René?

Daniel T: I'm gonna mute René.

Tancredi T: Can we hear him? I don't think that's the point. Is that right?

Daniel T: Oh, thank you. Is somebody speaking?

Tancredi T: Oh, well -- is the sound good enough for me to say anything?

Joël: No, Tancredi, your sound's very bad.

Daniel T: Yeah, your sound is very bad.

Tancredi T: All right, well, I'll hold my tongue.

Daniel T: Okay, sorry. But Joël, you seem to be about to speak.

Joël: No, I just wanted -- I was just grateful for all the information you put on the website, about the weather, the dates, everything in there. It was very useful for decision-making. So I appreciate the transparency about the information, and I've noticed that also with other people -- they had questions, I could easily refer them to the website, and it answered a lot of questions for a lot of people. So my gratitude towards the people who put that information together.

Daniel T: To a degree, I'd say the community put that information together, 'cause an important part of it was a survey. So thanks to the 950-plus, or 950 or so, people who answered the survey, which was a pretty important part of that information. I don't think we could have done the shortlisting without that. Maximilian.

Maximilian K: Yes. Thank you. I just wanted to make a quick point about the repeated mentioning of the conflicting dates with other burns, and how this could impact people who go to several a year. I think we have to take into account that that's probably a very small demographic of very eager burners, let's say. And we have the statistics about the availability of people, which is a much broader group of people who voted on where they would be available. So we have dates in June, also in September, but also in June, where a broad group of people indicated that they would be available. So I would suggest -- of course, take into account frequent burners' preferences and schedules -- but I wouldn't make it a main point in the decision-making process.

Daniel T: Thank you, Maximilian. We still have ten minutes pre-allocated to comments or discussion of the event dates, if you want to add something or withdraw something. I'm not sure how you do that, but you can try. Okay, Benoit.

Benoit: I agree, that's a fair point. If there was a huge difference between June and September, I think the survey results should win. But as long as they're close, I think it's important also to remember that the survey doesn't reach a lot of people who otherwise could or would come, because they haven't been part of our community to date. So that's why I think it's important to view it not just as who is here now -- as long as who is here now is kind of similar between the two, then we have to also think about people the survey didn't reach who could then join as part of the community later.

Daniel T: Thank you, Benoit. And over to Condor.

Condor: Yeah, just adding onto that -- we saw that in the registered people in Humans and the non-registered, there was a difference, non-registered were skewed towards September. And I think an easy explanation for that, or a possible one, is that that's people who are not going to Nowhere at the moment because they can't, because of the dates. When I speak to Borderland people, they're like, "September" -- there's way more enthusiasm for that 'cause it's not clashing with stuff. People are like, "F*** yeah. Absolutely." So there's also the aspect of -- if you think about it, a lot of the burners in Europe are in northern climates. They're in Scandinavia, they're in Britain, they're in Netherlands. They're places where the summer's packed in June. There's a s*** ton of stuff going on, just in terms of festivals and other things. And then September, summer's kind of over, it's getting cold, nights are getting shorter, and f*** yeah, people want a little trip to a hot burn in the south. So there is that. There is that too.

Daniel T: Thank you, Condor. Edmund?

Edmund S: Hello, everyone. I wasn't planning on saying anything, but maybe I just realized it's quite important to voice this concern of mine. This is very much my personal thoughts on it. I'm concerned that Nowhere elsewhere could become too pleasant. I went to Borderland, and a lot of people there obviously didn't know anything about the principles. Somebody tried to fight me in the magic sauna. I haven't had a single interaction like that at Nowhere. I think the heat deterrent is important, just to almost filter the crowd. I do not think -- I don't want it to be canceled one year, but I would be very concerned about making it too clement. So yeah, thanks very much.

Daniel T: Thank you, Edmund. I kind of want to answer this as somebody living in Barcelona, in Spain. It is pretty hot in September and in June. It's not cold. There's a bit more rain, it's a little bit colder, but it's still pretty hot.

Participant: It's really f****** hot.

Daniel T: Yeah. It's not gonna be -- and it is gonna be in the desert still, so there's still gonna be inconveniences.

Edmund S: Yeah, I do live in Barcelona.

Daniel T: So, go on. Does anybody else want to add something? We have six more minutes. If nobody wants to speak, then the vote will close in six minutes. Otherwise, if Andrew -- Andrew can keep speaking for thirty-six minutes, I think. Go on, Andrew.

Andrew S: Okay, super quickly, I was gonna say -- I know my initial vote was first week in June, but I think either way, the bottom line for me is, yes, we want the intensity. That is the reason I love Nowhere and I don't go to other burns. I go to Nowhere because I like the pressure cooker. But there's a point where the pressure cooker becomes unhealthy, and I've experienced -- I've been there almost every year since 2009, and there's certain events which I used to run, which I don't run now, because it's too much in the afternoon heat. So whether it's first week of June or September, yes, it's still gonna be hot, we're gonna have the pressure cooker, it's still the desert. But we want it to grow, and if it doesn't grow, if we don't attract new people, it's gonna die. That's what we're gonna be left with. So yeah, that's my thought. It's still gonna be hot, but it still has to be enjoyable at the end of the day. We're not there to torture ourselves. It's not supposed to be torture as much as we want the edge.

Daniel T: I think there is a workshop for that at a different camp, but...

Andrew S: Yeah. Thank you.

Katia S: Where is my hand?

Daniel T: We can hear you, yeah. You can speak, Katia.

Katia S: Ah, you can hear me?

Daniel T: Yeah.

Katia S: Oh, great. Yeah, I just wanted to repeat my message that I wrote in the chat -- what Edmund mentioned about Borderland's sparkle ponies. It doesn't have anything to do with water on the land, or that it's close to the cities, but mostly because the Stockholm community was growing a little bit too fast and doing amazing parties, and then everybody decided to go to Borderland, including -- they have many sparkle ponies who come only for the weekend. So it's not about temperature, or how much water they have provided. And yeah, I do think that September could be a good option. I unfortunately missed half of the conversation, and I have deleted all the emails, so I don't have a link to vote. But if I can vote verbally, I would vote for September.

Daniel T: Are you an asociado, Katia?

Katia S: Yes.

Daniel T: Then I can show you a link that you can use to vote. One moment.

Katia S: Okay. Thank you. Do I have to do it in the next three minutes?

Daniel T: Possibly. It's certainly better to do it sooner rather than later. We will make a clear announcement that we're about to close the vote, so you'll have a moment there, and you can say, "Oh, wait, give me an extra minute," and we're obviously not gonna close the vote while somebody's asking for an extra minute. But maybe get ready to vote.

Katia S: Yep. Perfecto. Thank you.

Daniel T: Anybody want to say something the last two minutes?

Ward D: I could say something.

Daniel T: Go for it, Ward.

Ward D: Some of it was already in the notes of the meeting, but, in my opinion, the birds are gonna maybe screw us over on the new land, with all the restrictions around it. And that's usually from May till June, or April to June, that there are restrictions around birds. So maybe -- if you wanna kill three birds with one stone -- that would be why my preference, as an asociado, is to do it in September. Because then you avoid the red-plus zone, and also you have the birds' nesting season that you avoid. But also there's the whole academic season that's also in the notes, that you kind of avoid, because they start late September or something. So that would be-

Pablo V: Which season starts late September? Sorry, can you repeat?

Ward D: The academic season.

Pablo V: Oh, right. Yes.

Ward D: A lot of European countries start at the end of September or mid-September. So there's potential for a lot more people who are in the academic world. Anyway, so yeah, my personal preference would be June as well, but my board hat, or organizational hat, says September. So unfortunately, yeah, that's it. Do we -- this is a question for Daniel, or whoever is on this call -- if we get a no for the new land, or in general, no for the birds nesting season, then we can't even organize the event there in the new year.

Daniel T: So there's a kind of separate decision of the site, right?

Ward D: Yeah, yeah.

Daniel T: Which we're hoping to have a decision on by December, is what we've discussed in the board meetings.

Ward D: Yeah.

Daniel T: And that is a separate decision. I believe Daniela has applied for the permits for both sites. So we'll have the answers from INAGA for both sites, for the sets of dates. If there's a difference in the dates allowed between the sites, I guess we'll have to figure that out at that point. If we then get the go-ahead for the event next year to happen on the new site, yeah, there will be a bit of complexity there. I'm not sure-

Ward D: Yeah.

Daniel T: -- exactly what we do with that at that point. I don't have a clear answer for that. Sorry.

Ward D: It's something to talk about later, especially when we know more about the new land and about this permit.

Daniel T: It's partly why I've been trying to disentangle the new site from the event itself, because there's so much complexity on both sides, and it's difficult if they're both entangled to move forward. But Pablo-

Ward D: Yeah.

Daniel T: -- is gonna cut through the Gordian knot and tell us exactly what to do.

Pablo V: Yes, we have requested the sites. I just wanna say that the stakes are high, and it's important to change the date. But remember, we're testing it for one year, and I've been in events that have been changing the date every year, even the month, and sometimes the season. So remember, we're still a community. Even if something goes terribly wrong, or everything goes terribly wrong, it will be one year. We will learn a lot. I think we did the best we could with this process. We have been clear on why we're moving. We're just not sure where. And whatever comes will be the best decision we can collectively make. So I think whatever happens, let's commit and embrace it. There's been a lot of work going into this, and I don't think we could have done it better.

Daniel T: Thank you, Pablo. I'll lower your hand. There. Okay, so it's nine oh two. So what I'm gonna do is I'll use my phone to start a one-minute timer, and if nobody wants to speak for a minute, then we'll move on to the results. And if anybody speaks at any point, I will restart the timer. And if we get to half past, then at that point I will eventually interrupt the person speaking and produce the result. I've started the timer. Fifteen seconds left.

Joël: What will happen if we don't sell any tickets next year?

Daniel T: What would happen if we don't sell any tickets any year? Yes.

Joël: Yeah. We have a new date, and the ticket sale plummets.

Daniel T: So, based on -- we've done our best to survey the interest for those dates, and it seemed like the dates that we pre-selected -- yeah, that did restart the timer -- the dates we pre-selected were ones where a lot of people intended to attend. So I think it's unlikely that we're gonna sell no tickets. Whether we're gonna sell more tickets, fewer tickets, an equal amount of tickets, that is unknowable at this point. There's plenty of arguments for all those perspectives. Like, the lower heat might draw back some people who were not coming. We might get the Borderland overflow, or we might get -- I don't know, we can't possibly know exactly how many tickets we'll sell, but it seems very unlikely that we'll sell no tickets.

Peter D: And I'll use this as a slight time to plug an upcoming work group. For October, I'm gonna start the twenty twenty-seven finance work group. And the point there is to come up with our budget for next year in a collaborative way. That budget has some things that are fixed -- we can't really get half the price of the toilets to go away. But we can control things like ticket pricing levels, number of tickets for low income, number of tickets for potentially an under-twenty-six kind of program to bring some youth into our age brackets. We've got levers for how much to spend on art, and there's a few others. There's not a lot of things we can lever, but there are things we can lever, and part of that process will also be gates -- so as we sell a certain number of tickets, i.e. a certain amount of revenue, then we open up money for creativity or things like that. So the plan next year will be a little less off the cuff and a little bit more thoughtful, if that's the right way to put it. Partially because we have to -- as an association, we have to have a budget that the association agrees to, and I'd rather not just be writing it myself, or letting Claude do it. So we're gonna get community involvement, and have a few fun discussions, which nobody will agree on everything in, but we'll come to a conclusion, and that'll be our budget for next year. So that should account for, I would say, anything from a population of fifteen hundred to three thousand. And we kind of have to plan for that range. Whether or not that is our actual range, where we end up in that range is a function of human sociology, which we can't predict, at least not with enough accuracy nine months in advance. All right.

Daniel T: I think if you want to join a working group that's gonna be even more polarizing than event dates, join the ticket price working group. I'm sure that would be a fun, peaceful working group with nobody having strong opinions and-

Peter D: Yeah.

Daniel T: You know?

Peter D: At least they'll all be in one place, so we can put it in a box. Yeah.

Daniel T: For those who don't know, there is this -- I'll just steal the time to pimp out the working group concept that Peter, you proposed, in the board meetings. So this is the way that we get things done between events, the working groups. Anybody can register a working group, and they can use that to get work done. There's details about that on the website. Feel free to ask on Discord and so on. But this is basically a container for work that happens between events, that doesn't have to be in a department. So please feel free to make use of that to get things done. Benoit, you have a question or statement?

Benoit: Can we please let the vote close and then talk about other things after?

Daniel T: We probably can. There is a question there -- do you start a public information campaign to educate the masses we have with this? Yeah, we'll need to communicate this out. Yes, absolutely. We'll need to do a proper outreach campaign and get people to know about this event. Okay. I'm gonna start the one-minute timer again. Fifteen seconds left. No, Peter. Okay. So, no more questions. If you are still in the process of voting, please speak up now. Otherwise, fairly shortly, I will be closing the vote. I have a sort of temptation to do it live, but I've done enough live demos in my life to know that that's just asking for it to go wrong. So what do you think, Peter? As an experienced geek, do we click the button live, or-

Peter D: I've also -- I've got ninety-

Daniel T: -- yeah, maybe I just don't do it.

Peter D: I've got ninety-four PRs I'm about to push. So let's get this done. I've changed two-thirds of Humans since this thing started, and I've gotta get a release out.

Daniel T: Definitely could not release all that right now.

Peter D: Yeah. Yeah.

Daniel T: So shall I click on close?

Peter D: Yeah.

Daniel T: Off screen. Just so you know, there are ninety-seven answers. Seventy-five percent of the asociados have voted, which is a pretty good turnout. I mean, I don't know -- we're not gonna do a vote about whether to do it live or not. I think everybody's stressing out, so let me just close it, and then share my screen.

Peter D: I'm sure at least five of them will complain tomorrow that they missed the window.

Daniel T: I'll click on close.

Benoit: Drop it.

Daniel T: Go on? Go ahead, you said. Okay. So-

Benoit: I said drop it.

Daniel T: Drop it. Okay. I have clicked on close. Right. And I'm not gonna click on the results ahead of you. I'm going to share my tab. This one, I think. And I'm gonna click on results on this one. And the current winning date is seventh to thirteenth of June. So that is based on all the dates being available. We will publish the CSV, or the JSON, so you can analyze the results yourself. I'm not gonna re-explain how the ranking works. This is the current available date. I could run it -- try to take out seventh to thirteenth of June, in case it becomes unavailable, and see what the date would be if that becomes unavailable. Would that be of interest?

Pablo V: Yeah.

Daniel T: I guess-

Pablo V: Yes.

Daniel T: -- so if that becomes unavailable-

Pablo V: And sorry, if you could comment on by how much margin they won as well, for those who can see it.

Jonathan C: It doesn't show.

Daniel T: It doesn't show that, because of the way the pairwise comparisons work. It's just the dates that won against all the other dates.

Pablo V: Okay.

Daniel T: I think it won against every single date, so there's no cycle there, which is handy, because it's then less confusing. The next highest date, if this gets taken out, would be sixth to twelfth -- oh, hold on.

Jonathan C: That's true.

Daniel T: Hold on. Originally -- yeah, it would be sixth to twelfth of September. So that's the next most popular date if we take out seventh to thirteenth of June. Does anybody have-

Pablo V: That's convenient. We only have to change one letter from the previous date, so it's the minimum thing we could do.

Daniel T: Oh, yeah. Well, it just shifts by one digit, but yeah. No, but it's still not just one letter, I think. So the birds will -- someone's asking me to do the third one. I will do the third one as well. What if sixth to twelfth of September is not available either, for some reason? Then the next one would be thirteenth to nineteenth of September. And if that somehow is not available, might as well do it -- the next one would be twentieth to twenty-sixth. So September ends up taking over if June goes out. If that week is available, it seems to be the one that wins. I guess, obviously, if I take this out, maybe it's gonna move back to June. Let's find out. Yeah, it moves back to June, then. But otherwise, it's seventh to thirteenth of June, unless, of course, the birds tell us to bugger off. Or rather, INAGA tells us to bugger off for the birds. So, does anybody have any reactions, any things they want to share here?

Pablo V: [bird calls]

Daniel T: The birds have the final vote.

Pablo V: Yay.

Daniel T: Jonathan.

Jonathan C: I can say that I really like this June, because if that's the event date, that means my birthday will fall during build, which is the thing I enjoy doing most in life. So, thank everybody.

Daniel T: Yeah. We all hope the birds hurry up. It would be good to have that clarity, because that makes a big difference if it's June or September.

Jonathan C: The birds can use the Glitch play space if they need to hurry up.

Pablo V: We also get the most builders with this date, so that should de-risk build. If not tickets, we'll see about that.

Daniel T: Anyone else have a reaction? I'm still processing.

Joao T: Uh, yeah.

Daniel T: But the other people are quicker than me.

Joao T: If you open the pairwise comparison, is that like a dropdown that we could actually see some information?

Daniel T: Yeah.

Joao T: Because-

Daniel T: You can see all the comparisons-

Joao T: Yeah.

Daniel T: -- between all the different dates. Do you recall how the ranking algorithm works, or do you need a demo of it again?

Joao T: Not sure we need it, if that is just comparing two pairs of dates based on people's-

Daniel T: Yeah.

Joao T: -- responses. Is this available for everyone else to see on the-

Daniel T: Yeah.

Joao T: -- comments?

Daniel T: The whole result -- this is not yet available. It will be published tomorrow-

Joao T: Oh, okay.

Daniel T: -- because I need to sleep, after this.

Joao T: Sure. Fair.

Daniel T: Calm down from the excitement and sleep. But it will be published tomorrow, along with the recording of this call. And then you'll be able to get the JSON and analyze it whichever way you want, run it on a different ranking algorithm, and vocally argue for a different ranking algorithm next time, because this one didn't get the result that you wanted. But, you know, it was the one that we agreed. So, yeah, you'll have the full results tomorrow.

Joao T: On the pairwise comparison, can we see the comparison between the first and second place -- the date -- there was probably more votes than-

Daniel T: Probably, but this doesn't allow us to filter it so easily. So I mean, here you can see the seventh to thirteenth of June versus -- well, obviously, seventh to thirteenth of June won, because it won all the battles versus-

Joao T: Sure, sure, sure.

Daniel T: -- so it won versus sixth to twelfth of September by 53 to 39, and versus thirteenth to nineteenth of September by 50 to 41. So there is some margin of winning there.

Joao T: Yeah, because it's weird to see -- I understand that this is a complex algorithm of priorities, but it's weird to see a result of a vote with no actual numbers. So this number is-

Daniel T: Yeah.

Joao T: -- something that we can work with, I guess, like 53 to 39 of first place, second place. I understand it's not as straightforward, but at least we have some -- well, and I'm screenshotting this so I can look at it.

Daniel T: Feel free to. You'll obviously get all the data tomorrow, but-

Joao T: Yeah. Your problem is gonna be available, I understand. But it's just that then I can look, because you say, "Oh, yeah, in our complex algorithm that takes five minutes to explain, this is the winning result." But then just comparing the first with the second, we already get some data, because, particularly, after this day in June, there's like two or three in September. So it's like, oh, was this really close? Did a lot of people prefer-

Daniel T: What this is saying is that basically seventh to thirteenth of June won, was higher ranked than-

Joao T: Sure, sure. I understand.

Daniel T: -- September, like the fifteenth.

Joao T: Yeah, yeah. But it could be by two votes, by three votes, or by one vote, or by 30 votes.

Daniel T: Yeah.

Joao T: So there we see the comparison, that on the first and second position, it's kind of like -- there's like 30%.

Daniel T: It's by 14 votes. I'm curious how the pairwise comparison changes if I take out the seventh -- I imagine this gets recalculated as well. So then what we end up with is the sixth of September wins against thirteenth to nineteenth by 42 to 36, against twentieth to twenty-sixth by 51 to 30, and so on.

Joao T: Sure. Then we can analyze these results in a lot of ways because -- yeah. But okay, thank you.

Daniel T: Yeah. And I appreciate -- my research suggested that this would be the better algorithm to use for a vote like this, and I think so long as we have a decent algorithm and we stick to it, and it makes some sense, and it's explainable, then it's okay, and this one is explainable. In case you're confused about how it works, if you go to nobodies.team and click on event dates, you'll see there's a nice little interactive presentation of the algorithm, where you can really see how it works, so you can understand exactly how it works.

Joao T: Yeah.

Daniel T: Anybody else want to share their reaction?

Peter D: I can give it ranked choice voting. Let me share this. Where is my Claude? So this is the ranked choice voting. Does that work? You all can see that? So this is the rounds if you did the same thing through RCV. And the first one, in the R1 column, you can basically see how much percentage each one got as a winner. And then-

Daniel T: So it would've been the same with this one?

Peter D: Yeah, yeah, it would've been the same. So they should be roughly the same. But this just shows you that, like, 20% picked June 13th or June 7th or whatever, and 18% were June 6th. And as you eliminate the least one in each row, that's how the voting changes. So that's -- if that gives anybody a different perspective. And-

Daniel T: It's interesting that in this rank -- so this IRV, the third choice changes. It's no longer September, 14th to 20th of June goes up. 'Cause in the pairwise, the Tideman algorithm, it went 7th of June, then 6th of September, then 13th of September, then 20th of September.

Peter D: Well, that's because you're removing an option and then rerunning it. So you can't do that in this. So if I... hold on.

Jonathan C: Yes, I understood it, Peter. These things actually aren't comparable in that sense. You can't just look at R6 and say that would be the third choice.

Peter D: But you can tell Claude to do it, and have an answer in 45 seconds. Side note, your JSON file is missing the results completely. This is only in the CSV.

Daniel T: Okay. So we'll fix the JSON file. We'll publish the CSV.

Peter D: Yeah, fine. Welcome to my life, juggling -- as you can see, 47 different tabs. So if you remove June, then September wins, which you would expect. And if we now remove-

Daniel T: But it's 13th of September that wins instead of 6th, so it is different.

Peter D: Yeah. Yeah.

Daniel T: So it's not that the first two choices remain the same, only the first choice.

Peter D: Yeah. And that's generally why ranked choice voting is what's often done with a multiple-choice thing like this.

Daniel T: I'm not sure you've given a rationale for it other than-

Peter D: Well, listen, I think-

Daniel T: -- other than you prefer the 13th of September.

Peter D: Well, I mean, in most election systems in the world, ranked choice voting works over a pairing tally system, or at least that's what they're using, right? So now you get to September 6th. Right? So, yeah, that is interesting, though. They're close. In fairness, they are close.

Peter D: But yeah, it comes down to which people prioritize.

Jonathan C: It's an interesting effect, but there's probably a YouTube video that can better explain the mechanics of these voting systems, and what's good for what. Otherwise, there would be a known best system, right?

Daniel T: Yeah, they have -- my research was that they have different strengths and weaknesses, and the one that I chose deals well with the possibility of split voting. For example, if more people prefer September dates, but they split -- let's say there were three dates in September and only one date in June, which was a possibility, I didn't know how scattered they would be -- then this Tideman algorithm would recognize the fact that maybe a date in September is not the one that has the most first votes, but it's the second choice for most people. And so it basically deals with this kind of split voting better. That was what my research suggested. I'm not explaining it very well.

Daniel T: Is there a side Discord discussion on the bird track? There's not really a discussion there. We're just waiting for results from the government. There is a whole webpage sub-linked on the event dates site, because there's a whole page of research. We've done all the research we could, outside of getting a response from INAGA. So we know what the bird sites are near both sites, and we know what the regulations say should happen, which includes the fact that actually the event shouldn't be happening at all, even in our current location at our current time. Maybe, depending on how INAGA interprets the regulations -- we have no idea. We don't even know if there was an application to INAGA for the current site at some point in the past. Maybe there was, maybe there wasn't. I don't know, because-

Daniela M S: It's a check. Yeah, it was.

Daniel T: There was?

Daniela M S: There was. It's just a check.

Daniel T: But was INAGA already active at that point, like 20 years ago?

Daniela M S: Maybe. I mean, it's not 20 years ago that we've been on that new site.

Daniel T: Okay. But how long have we been on that new site?

Daniela M S: Years, I don't remember. But it was -- and if it was not this agency, it's a different one. But a check for flora and fauna, and flooding, all has to be done.

Daniel T: Yeah. So if anybody does have access to that report, we could use it to try and figure out how INAGA is likely to interpret the data that we do have on that page. But we've not been able to find any trace of -- if anybody has any INAGA report, that would be useful.

Daniela M S: We don't get a report. We just get an answer. Like-

Daniel T: Oh.

Daniela M S: -- even the comarca doesn't get a report. They just get an answer.

Daniel T: So they don't get the rationale, they just get a yes or no? Oh.

Daniela M S: Yes or no.

Daniel T: Okay. So then it's useless.

Daniela M S: Yeah.

Daniel T: Sorry. It was a futile quest. Okay. Well, does anybody want to share anything more or are we done? There's four minutes left for the original timeline for this meeting of an hour and a half. It doesn't look like we're gonna have to stretch it out another half hour. It doesn't look like everybody wants to stick around for that much longer. Yeah. Thank you for the first general assembly. Again, if you noticed any procedural aspects which meant that this was not quite tight enough as a general assembly, please mention them so we can make sure we fix them for the next one, so that we don't end up with board members of unknown legal status, because that would suck. Or statute changes that can be pushed back on or something. Okay. Well, Pablo, you sound like you want to say something.

Pablo V: Yeah, we're not only finishing the vote, we're finishing all the infrastructure for the vote -- the working group, the organization, the way to involve people. I think this has been a lot of work for that reason. Now we have this kind of learning as an asset. So whatever the result, I hope it's better than everything we had. But even without that, it's still been a massive effort. So kudos for the whole team who pushed this, and Humans, and everybody who participated, read the reports, asked questions. I think it's really encouraging to see the community step up like this.

Daniel T: Yeah. And please feel free to use this as a pattern if you think it worked -- the stuff we did there, connecting the community, the community calls, doing surveys, having a working group, discussions on Discord and so on. I think it worked fairly well to engage with the community, but maybe people might be able to add and improve this. But at least they can reuse what did work, from their perspective, for other working groups, because we know we have a few controversial decisions on our plate, here and there. For some reason, we don't agree about everything. I don't know why, but seems to be the case. All right. Cool. Thank you very much everybody for joining, and see you soon. Take care. Enjoy your night. And I don't know if there'll be a community call next week, but thank you for joining tonight, and thank you for voting, and thank you for participating, whatever way you participated.

Joël: Thank you for transparency. Thank you.

Daniela M S: Everyone, amazing.

Daniel T: Bye.

Joël: Thanks everyone. Bye.

Anna T: Bye. Thank you so much everyone.

Pablo V: Bye-bye.

Joël: Thank you.