Hello,
And please dont make us explain the same three times, the possition is very clear, Ataec steaks to the formal document, if you want to change it, we already talked to the National Agency, and it will have to be a change at the IT National Agency and once the formal EU document is changed we can take in consideration any change or other possibility (if we continue or not).
Please, we have already spoke and worte our possition, do not make us repeat again. ///
Here is the other persons e.mail. msofiatroise@gmail.com
Our best regards,
El 2021-10-12 22:57, Federico Venturini escribió:
Hello,
sorry Danielo but I do not understand why you deleted half of the initial proposal since it was agreed by consensus during Activity 1. For me now it sounds too much vague.
Could ATAEC express its opinion on my initial proposal?
If this issue will continue we will have to discuss it in an internal meeting.
Cheers
Federico On 11/10/2021 17:22, DoV wrote:
Hello again!
thanks fede for the reminder, perhaps we can move one step forward. We had some time for people to discuss and write. While some more replies may still come, so far there seems not to be other diverging ideas from what was already said.
From what I hear online (I was not there when the discussion started):
- there's a concern of the workload that a broader participant's
outreach would entitle for the partners
- there's a concern that the guidelines agreed in the application
text should be observed
- there is agreement on the fact that we want a diverse group of
participants
- there was some level of unclarity and unconcreteness on the
question of call-out outreach and selection of participants
- the previous invited to different understandings that have led to
the current disagreement
- there is will from all sides to find a solution that accommodates
everyone's needs in this issue
I want to add:
- we are a diverse consortium and this will no doubt bring an
interesting mix of people to activity 2
- from the spirit of activity 1, my impression is that we celebrate
the expertise, specialization and vision that each partner brings in
To move forward, I'd like to amend the proposal initiated by Fede, and call for further amendments or alternative proposals:
=> Call-out for participants for activity 2 will be open. Each organisation will manage the process of recruitment and selection of participants from their region according to their capacities and in line with the consortium agreements and project application.
Please react by Monday 18th 4pm.
Salud Danielo
pd: as a side note i want to mention that the COVID tunnel it's been a hard time for everyone and no less for the young artists. I hope this project can help them if a little to get back on their feet.
On 06/10/2021 08:13, DoV wrote:
Hello friends,
I hope you are safe and sound, rocking the environmental movement there where you are.
I wasn't aware of the issues raised in the course of this conversation, I want to thank everyone involved for bringing my attention to this question.
I will try my best to exercises a bit of facilitation here, I hope that is ok.
I have heard a few opinions shared over this list, and there is also a proposal on the table. I'd like to ask those who may have a substantially divergent position on this matter but have not share it yet, to please do it.
Thanks Danielo
Deep-t-orga mailing list -- deep-t-orga@eyfa.org To unsubscribe send an email to deep-t-orga-leave@eyfa.org
Deep-t-orga mailing list -- deep-t-orga@eyfa.org To unsubscribe send an email to deep-t-orga-leave@eyfa.org