<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><br class=""><div><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On Jul 20, 2020, at 8:37 PM, Fernando Frediani <<a href="mailto:fhfrediani@gmail.com" class="">fhfrediani@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class="">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" class="">
<div class=""><p class="">Thanks for sharing your reading on it but that not 'plain
English' as it may look like. 3.6 was written and thought for
policy proposal procedures not for what we are doing right now.
What we are doing right now is pure free discussion and
speculation. You have your view and I have mine. Using 3.6 to do
something else is a 'glued solution' that doesn't correspond to
what it was thought to.<br class=""></p></div></div></blockquote>You keep saying that with such confidence and certainty, but I am not so sure.</div><div><br class=""></div><div>It would have been very easy if that were the case to simply state “The policy development process” or “The policy development process outlined in this document.”</div><div><br class=""></div><div>That’s NOT what it says. It says “The process outlined in this document…” Now I admit that the fact it is not plural is an error, but it’s an error, not any sort of clarity in favor of your interpretation.<br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class=""><div class=""><p class="">
</p><p class="">For 3.6 to be used a proposal must be presented and be under
discussion with review and Last Call for at least 4 weeks. If it
passes then fine to conduct the resolution of this issue under
these new terms properly justified as 3.6 outlines.</p></div></div></blockquote>Yes, but that proposal could be to vary the chair election process just as much as to vary anything else in the document.</div><div><br class=""></div><div>Owen</div><div><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class=""><div class=""><p class="">Fernando<br class="">
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 21/07/2020 00:05, Owen DeLong wrote:<br class="">
</div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:1D3C0969-FC3F-4C21-A7FE-012AD60CEFCF@delong.com" class="">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" class="">
<br class="">
<div class=""><br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">On Jul 20, 2020, at 6:22 PM, Fernando Frediani
<<a href="mailto:fhfrediani@gmail.com" class="" moz-do-not-send="true">fhfrediani@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</div>
<br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
<div class="">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=UTF-8" class="">
<div class=""><p class="">Hi Owen. Sorry I don't really read the 3.6 the
same way as you. 3.6 in my view wasn't thought for
situation like this. It's being glued for the occasion
that's not the case. 3.6 is about how the proposals are
conducted, reviewed and passed within this forum in a
exceptional situation (pretty much where we are). All
points mentioned there have to do with proposals. We are
not discussing or advancing a proposal right now.<br class="">
</p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
That’s your special interpretation. It’s not what a plain
english reading of the language says.</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">1.<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>The
PDP is in the document containing 3.6. The PDP is a process.</div>
<div class="">2.<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>The
co-chair election process is in the document containing 3.6. The
co-chair election process is a process.</div>
<div class="">3.<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>3.6
says “The process outlined in this document…”.</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">
<div class=""><div class=""> <br class="webkit-block-placeholder"></div><p class="">What CAN actually be done within 3.6 is
someone to properly present a proposal to amend the PDP
and fix the issues we are discussing here and then have
this proposal treated under 3.6 (with no less than 4
weeks including the Last Call - which coincides with
your point number 3 below).</p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
I suppose that could also work, though it’s rather indirect and
adds (unnecessary IMHO) complexity.<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">
<div class=""><p class="">In my opinion proposal
AFPUB-2019-GEN-007-DRAFT01 is ready for it, but I guess
that may not reach consensus. So a much shorter proposal
with just the essential we need to resolve this
situation is the way to go under 3.6. Would that match
with what you are trying to put ?<br class="">
</p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
IMHO, AFPUB-2019-GEN-007-DRAFT01 is a fatally flawed proposal
and I would not support it as currently written.</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">I think a much more direct proposal to clarify an expanded
scope of 3.6 (closer to my interpretation instead of your rather
narrow interpretation) would be the most likely to gain
consensus, frankly. I think such is unnecessary, but _IF_ you
insist on the (oddly) narrow interpretation of 3.6 you have put
forth, then…</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">Owen</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">
<div class=""><div class=""> <br class="webkit-block-placeholder"></div><p class="">Fernando<br class="">
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 20/07/2020 21:52, Owen
DeLong wrote:<br class="">
</div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:9418E82A-1159-498D-ABEB-6AE4CC3DAD8E@delong.com" class="">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=UTF-8" class="">
<br class="">
<div class=""><br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">On Jul 20, 2020, at 10:00 AM, Fernando
Frediani <<a href="mailto:fhfrediani@gmail.com" class="" moz-do-not-send="true">fhfrediani@gmail.com</a>>
wrote:</div>
<br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
<div class="">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" class="">
<div class="">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 20/07/2020
13:39, Owen DeLong wrote:<br class="">
</div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:CE966FE8-5868-492C-91B0-B1A6B36CE4BA@delong.com" class="">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" class="">
<br class="">
<div class=""><clip>
<div class="">
<div class="">
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
</div>
</div>
This is an absurd claim. The standard (as
you mention below) is a “raise of hands”
vote. This mechanism even in person does not
allow people to verify that their vote was
cast correctly, nor is it fully auditable
(indeed, it has no audit trail and is not at
all audible).</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">Placing more stringent
requirements than exist on the current
system as an acceptance criteria for a
system deployed urgently in a time of crisis
makes little sense to me.</div>
</blockquote>
You are not making the things easier given the
circumstances and all has been been discussed
here.<br class="">
What is being said is analogous to raise of hand
and is also a indisputable way to eliminate most
possible fraud that have been pointed.<br class="">
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
It is not my goal to make things easier for you or
even necessarily easier in general.</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">It is my goal to achieve the best possible
outcome through a mechanism that comes as close to
applying the PDP rules as possible.</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">
<div class="">
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:CE966FE8-5868-492C-91B0-B1A6B36CE4BA@delong.com" class="">
<div class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">
<div class=""><p class="">4 - In order to either
choose another Co-Chair or to extend
the current one term there must be a
vote with raise of hands. There is
no other way out of the PDP this can
be done.<br class="">
</p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
This statement ignores CPM section 3.6:</div>
<blockquote style="margin: 0 0 0 40px; border:
none; padding: 0px;" class="">
<div class="">
<h3 style="box-sizing: border-box;
font-family: "Open Sans",
sans-serif; font-weight: normal;
line-height: 1.1; color: rgb(117, 117,
117); margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom:
10px; font-size: 24px; caret-color:
rgb(117, 117, 117);" class="">3.6 Varying
the Process</h3>
</div>
<div class=""><p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin:
0px 0px 5px; caret-color: rgb(117, 117,
117); color: rgb(117, 117, 117);
font-family: Roboto, sans-serif;
font-size: 14px;" class="">The process
outlined in this document may vary in
the case of an emergency. Variance is
for use when a one-time waiving of some
provision of this document is required.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div class="">
<ol style="box-sizing: border-box;
margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 10px;
caret-color: rgb(117, 117, 117); color:
rgb(117, 117, 117); font-family: Roboto,
sans-serif; font-size: 14px;" class="">
<ol class="">
<li style="box-sizing: border-box;" class="">The decision to vary the
process is taken by a Working Group
Chair.</li>
<li style="box-sizing: border-box;" class="">There must be an explanation
about why the variance is needed.</li>
<li style="box-sizing: border-box;" class="">The review period, including
the Last Call, shall not be less than
four weeks.</li>
<li style="box-sizing: border-box;" class="">If there is consensus, the
policy is approved and it must be
presented at the next Public Policy
Meeting.</li>
</ol>
</ol>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
Clearly this is the kind of exceptional
circumstance in which some variance could be
justified.</div>
</blockquote>
Sorry I don't see 3.6 applying to this situation
on *any* of points mentioned. This section is
about how the policies discussion, review, last
call, etc work 1) As I understand this decision
is not up to the Chairs to take 2)Yes, we are
working on the explanation, but who will give it
? Normally is whoever take the decision. 3)
Nothing to do with elections 4) Nothing to do
with the current scenario. There is no proper
policy under discussion to be approved, only a
discussion of what to do about the next
elections.<br class="">
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
It applies to all of the CPM ("The process outlined in
this document may vary…”).</div>
<div class=""><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>1.
If not the co-chairs, then who?</div>
<div class=""><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>2.
I think the explanation is well understood… “Because
in person meeting during the COVID crisis is
impossible.”</div>
<div class=""><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>3.
I’m not so sure about this. Whatever election process
we decide on should be put to a final community
comment</div>
<div class=""><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>period
of some form. I see no reason that should be less than
4 weeks.</div>
<div class=""><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>4.
So you’re saying that the determination of how to (or
whether to) conduct co-chair elections should be made</div>
<div class=""><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>by
some other method than community consensus and should
not be considered policy at least for this meeting?</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class=""><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>How
does that work?</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">
<div class="">
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:CE966FE8-5868-492C-91B0-B1A6B36CE4BA@delong.com" class="">
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">I still say that a (virtual)
raising of hands using the mechanisms
available in nearly every conferencing
system capable of supporting</div>
<div class="">this meeting has the following
advantages:</div>
<div class="">q<br class="">
</div>
<div class=""><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>1.<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>Only
meeting attendees may vote.</div>
<div class=""><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>2.<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>Botting
your meeting attendance would be reasonably
difficult, so it would be difficult for a
person to stuff the ballot box.</div>
<div class=""><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>3.<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>It
does meet the literal requirements of the
existing PDP.</div>
<div class=""><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>4.<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>If
we place reasonable bounds on meeting
registration, we can avoid the so-called
“sleeper cell” effect that some have</div>
<div class=""><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>put
forth as a concern. (Personally, I think
this is less likely in a virtual meeting
anyway).</div>
<div class=""><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>5.<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>If
we place reasonable bounds on meeting
registration, we also manage to prevent (2)
from being a concern.</div>
<div class=""><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>6.<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>By
“reasonable bounds”, I mean pick a date
certain in the past by which one must have
been subscribed to RPD.</div>
<div class=""><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>Each
email subscribed to RPD is entitled to one
corresponding meeting registration if they
choose to. No subscribed</div>
<div class=""><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>email,
no registration for the meeting.</div>
</blockquote>
I quiet like this idea, and that is exactly
which is under discussion in one of the policies
that should advance, but this is not backed in
any part of PDP as far as I know as the moment.
Who will determine what date is this ?<br class="">
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
This would most certainly be a variation of the PDP to
meet the emergency as it exists which would be
permitted under 3.6, so, yes,</div>
<div class="">my argument here depends on my argument
above which you have claimed you are not buying.
However, hopefully with my expansions on</div>
<div class="">the topic above, I can perhaps convince
you to change your mind and recognize that without
something like that, we literally box</div>
<div class="">ourselves into a situation with no way
forward until such time as we can arrange an in-person
meeting. Personally, I think that’s</div>
<div class="">far from the best outcome.</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">
<div class="">
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:CE966FE8-5868-492C-91B0-B1A6B36CE4BA@delong.com" class="">
<div class=""><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>7.<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>My
suggestions for the date certain would be
the first day of the originally scheduled in
person AIS 2020 (May 31) or</div>
<div class=""><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>the
originally scheduled first day of the public
policy meeting (June 8 IIRC).</div>
</blockquote><p class="">This would make sense if there was
basis for it, but currently there is AFAIK.</p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
The basis for it is 3.6. Read the CPM carefully read
3.6. It’s not rocket science. The CPM describes all of
the policies, the PDP, and the co-chair election
process within the one document. Section 3.6 provides
for variance of the process[sic] should be processes
within</div>
<div class="">the document. That includes the co-chair
election process unless you can show me why it does
not.</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">Owen</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">
<div class=""><p class="">Fernando<br class="">
</p>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:CE966FE8-5868-492C-91B0-B1A6B36CE4BA@delong.com" class="">
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">If anyone has a reason they
don’t think this is viable, please express
it. So far, I’ve seen lots of calls for
other solutions, but this</div>
<div class="">seems to be the approach with
the fewest drawbacks and which can easily be
implemented in time.</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">Owen</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">
<div class="">
<div class=""> <br class="webkit-block-placeholder">
</div><p class="">Regards<br class="">
Fernando</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On
20/07/2020 03:06, Daniel Yakmut
wrote:<br class="">
</div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:CAB3X6meTt=Pw8az5fmYeO6vaSiNOLL8pkG91YuBemSAjFWiwOw@mail.gmail.com" class="">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" class="">
<div dir="auto" class="">Dear All,
<div dir="auto" class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div dir="auto" class="">We arrive
at the airport and I will be
turning the simple matter placed
on the table into a circus. The
simple matter was:</div>
<div dir="auto" class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div dir="auto" class="">1. We
will have AIS 2020 online and in
September.</div>
<div dir="auto" class="">2. A
Co-chair's tenure has already
ended. So an electronic election
is being proposed as part of the
AIS 2020 Agenda. The question
is, is this possible?</div>
<div dir="auto" class="">3. It is
a fact that the Co-chair is
currently serving within an
extended period. </div>
<div dir="auto" class="">4. We now
agree that the introduction of
e-voting is inevitable, as
demonstrated by the pandemic.</div>
<div dir="auto" class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div dir="auto" class="">However
it is clear that</div>
<div dir="auto" class="">1. We are
going to have an online meeting
, as nobody has disagreed to
that.</div>
<div dir="auto" class="">2. There
is a strong advocacy, for a
process to include e-voting in
the Region, but the timing is
short. Therefore we need to
commence the plan of creating an
enabling atmosphere to integrate
e-voting.</div>
<div dir="auto" class="">3. We
need to ratify the extended
period for a co-chair
tentatively for 12months. Which
he has spent a month or so
already.</div>
<div dir="auto" class="">4. Ensure
we have an acceptable e-voting
system ready for the next date
of election.</div>
<div dir="auto" class="">5. Let
agreed clearly on this simple
issue and prepare for the coming
meeting.</div>
<div dir="auto" class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div dir="auto" class="">Simply</div>
<div dir="auto" class="">Daniel</div>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br class="">
<div class="gmail_quote">On Jul
19, 2020 11:20 PM, "Fernando
Frediani" <<a href="mailto:fhfrediani@gmail.com" moz-do-not-send="true" class="">fhfrediani@gmail.com</a>>
wrote:<br type="attribution" class="">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc
solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="auto" class="">
<div class="">I have read
this message and several
questions come to mind as
for example:</div>
<div dir="auto" class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div dir="auto" class="">-
What basis was used to say
"it was overwhelmingly"
rejected ?</div>
<div dir="auto" class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div dir="auto" class="">-
Who actuallty represents
the "current" community to
state it was "totally
rejected" ?</div>
<div dir="auto" class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div dir="auto" class="">-
Whats basis was used to
say that it would not work
in the region if that
works in several other
places and RIRs including,
with auditable systems ?</div>
<div dir="auto" class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div dir="auto" class="">-
Whats basis is used to say
rhe community that voted
for the current Co-Chair
in Kampla has the same
confidence in him and that
he would win ? It seems
more a personal wish than
anything based on fact or
logic.</div>
<div dir="auto" class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div dir="auto" class="">-
Even in order to extend
the current Co-Chair term
the PDP MUST be followed
and there are no other
ways written there other
than another vote.
Otherwise how can this be
done ?</div>
<div dir="auto" class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div dir="auto" class="">Fernando</div>
<div dir="auto" class=""><br class="">
<br class="">
<div class="gmail_quote" dir="auto">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On
Sun, 19 Jul 2020,
18:08 Emem William,
<<a href="mailto:dwizard65@gmail.com" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true" class="">dwizard65@gmail.com</a>>
wrote:<br class="">
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px
#ccc
solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="auto" class="">
<div dir="auto" class="">Dear
All, </div>
<div dir="auto" class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div dir="auto" class="">I can
recollect that a
similar proposal
was proposed as a
policy and it was
overwhelmingly
rejected in
Angola. The
current community
totally rejected
the policy no one
except the authors
supported the idea
because we know it
can't work in this
region. Using
online voting now
would be like
passing the policy
using the
backdoor. Am sure
Jordie would like
this idea and
hence his
enthusiasm.
However my candid
opinion is that we
can't do this. The
most appropriate
way forward is to
allow the Co chair
who has been doing
a fantastic job to
continue for
another 12 months
or till the next
face to face
meeting. The
community that
voted him in
Kampala still have
confidence in him.
In any case even
with an online
election he would
still likely win
but I don't want
polices to be
passed through the
back door.
Therefore I think
the most
appropriate way
for this has been
suggested as an
extension for the
co-chair who's
seat would have
been contested.</div>
<div dir="auto" class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div dir="auto" class="">Cheers.</div>
<div dir="auto" class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div data-smartmail="gmail_signature" class="">Emem E.
William<br class="">
<br class="">
</div>
</div>
______________________________<wbr class="">_________________<br class="">
RPD mailing list<br class="">
<a href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true" class="">RPD@afrinic.net</a><br class="">
<a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd" rel="noreferrer
noreferrer" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true" class="">https://lists.afrinic.net/<wbr class="">mailman/listinfo/rpd</a><br class="">
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br class="">
______________________________<wbr class="">_________________<br class="">
RPD mailing list<br class="">
<a href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net" moz-do-not-send="true" class="">RPD@afrinic.net</a><br class="">
<a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true" class="">https://lists.afrinic.net/<wbr class="">mailman/listinfo/rpd</a><br class="">
<br class="">
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br class="">
RPD mailing list<br class="">
<a href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net" class="" moz-do-not-send="true">RPD@afrinic.net</a><br class="">
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd" moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a><br class="">
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br class="">
</blockquote>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br class="">
RPD mailing list<br class="">
<a href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net" class="" moz-do-not-send="true">RPD@afrinic.net</a><br class="">
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd" moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a><br class="">
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br class="">
</blockquote>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br class="">
RPD mailing list<br class="">
<a href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net" class="" moz-do-not-send="true">RPD@afrinic.net</a><br class="">
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a><br class="">
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br class="">
</blockquote>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br class="">RPD mailing list<br class=""><a href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net" class="">RPD@afrinic.net</a><br class="">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd<br class=""></div></blockquote></div><br class=""></body></html>