• online 202209 extension2 en

last modified October 9 by facilitfsm



ORIGINAL TRANSCRIPT IC  ENGLISH VERSION ( automatic translation from  version ES )

IC MEETING SEPTEMBER 24      @10  -  @20  -  @30  -  @40  -  @50  -  @60  -  Chat 

Present :  Bartiria /IAI @C49-52 -- Carminda/Katalizo @12 @14 @16 @18 @C30 -- Cmat mali -- Hamouda/sec CI @1 @5 @11 @17 @24 @35 @37 @46 @48 @50 @53 @57 @60 @63 @65 -- Ian / Attac @4 @25 @28 @33 @38 @42 @45 @C3-16-28-33-36-44-60-64- 67-- kamal/ FMAS - Leonardo/ CUT -- Liege/ FDIM @13 @15 @23 @51 @C24-56-72--- Massa CGLTE/OA @6 @8 @10 @40 -- MIke/ IAI @ 20 @32 @39 @52 @C8-11-26-34-51-55-61-63 -- Mirek/ PS2 @C6-14-20-23-32-38-47-53-70 -- Nilza/ Geledez -- Norma /UPMS @36 @43 -- Oded /CIVES -- Ole/ NSF/FC @54 @C58 -- Oscar /? @2 -- Ouattara/ FSA/FC @7 @22 @27 @30 @34 @C50 -- Pierre/ Caritas @9 @44@61 @64 -- Rand ISF/FC @C43-45 -- Rita/ Ciranda @ 26 @31 @C4-12-15-17-21-27-31-35-40-42-46-57-59-66-68-69 -- Rosy/CEAAL @3 @21 @49 @56 @58 @59 @62 @C1-2-5 -7 -10-13-18-25-29-37-39-41-48-54-62-65-71-73 -- (Sheila IPF @17A) -- Sushovan APSF/FC @19 @55 --Tiburcio /IPS @29 @41 @47 @C9-19-22 -- Youssef / PSF/FC -- Zacharia/ PSF/FC



Start of Recording 


@1 Hamouda: I think it's a bit difficult to keep working like this, because we're not making progress in the work that we're doing, we're doing a lot of work, we're mobilizing people for Tunisia, and it seems like, for 3 weeks now or 4 weeks , there is no discussion. there is nothing left, and that worries us a little.



Related to all of that, and just to be able to move on, really, it's a little heartbreaking to do all these efforts there, all the efforts that our friend Rosie is putting in place, to be able to find the interpreters, and finally, to get things done. easier, and there has to be a little bit of respect between us: when we send an email, we answer an email, they ask you to confirm, and nobody confirms, except two or three people who have confirmed on the list, and those who confirmed who could not be with us, we thank them, but I think that out of respect for our work that we are doing, to rebuild the council, to try to rethink the future, the future of the forum and all that, I think it is important that we can at least have a respect to confirm or not confirm, like this,if there is no quorum, we stop the meeting and move on.



It's a bit sad, it's really not very good, but in any case, thank you for those who are with us present and present, we have 2 points on the agenda today. The 1st is in relation to the candidacies of the council that have been presented, for 3 candidacies that we have: the Asia-Pacific forum, the follow-up committee, the Katalyzo Asia-Pacific committee, and the coalition for the land, water and seeds of Mali, not from Mali, from West Africa, since it is a network. So this is our first.


The second. We are going to discuss a little to say a little about the state of things in Tunisia and at this same point for Tunisia, we are going to talk about what we have launched as a proposal in relation to the continents, the discussions about the continents. , and after the themes. I don't know if all of you received the documents that were sent out yesterday, the translations from the council nomination pools. So you have the floor the updated questions send them I think everyone has received the documents.



I'm also thinking about what Rita said a little bit earlier: we also have to have a discussion about the assembly, about the forum, the assembly of the forums, how are we progressing, who is there, is- what is there a working group? We don't know, so it wasn't clear. Francine I don't think she's with us today. there is a group that worked on that. I leave the word to you, dear friends (there are microphones that are open massage in Liège Oscar, thank you). You have the word, you have the word.



@2 - Oscar - I would first like to point out that there is still an intention, interest and above all an activity, which is not suddenly arising, but is continuity, continuity of long effort, long work, and like all these types of processes has high and it has casualties, they have new difficulties, but it seems to me that in particular the issues of organization and methodology have perhaps taken a greater time and effort, and I would say a little disproportionate, with respect to the seriousness and the need to do some kind of presence of the Forum as I know tried on other occasions.

Rosa : Excuse me Oscar but we are talking about the candidacies for the IC, and if you have any comments, I think that is the point. That's the first.

Oscar: Yes, I already understood. only that it seemed to me that it was necessary to make this introduction, this reminder, but later I would give a point of view on the candidacies, if it is obviously necessary to go into that topic, well, that is why it has been cited, but if the outline is left out broader, where these points are being given, these issues of the process, I think it would be a mistake. I will come back to this a bit later. Thanks.

Hamouda: Yes Oscar Rosy


@3 Rosy: Well, I don't know if I had mentioned, I arrived earlier but raise your hand about the doubtless, and things that concern us at a continental level, and I think we have to advance the 3 candidacies about Katalizo, about I don't remember the name of Mali, and the realization of email, and the people of Mali, and the Asian social forum, it seems to me and we as CEAAL are giving our approval for them to enter the IC.

I think that the international council needs to expand, continue with organizations that want to be part of it, I think we should give our vote for a Yes, because this makes us grow: a presence from Africa, the presence from Asia, and the presence of colleagues from North America particularly young people, then this is our position. Thanks.

Liege I didn't ask for a word, it wasn't ok


@4 Ian : No, to say as a rose, that it seems very important to me that attac France also supports these three candidacies, and that they are going to bring a little energy I imagine in the IC, in the entire process of the social forum , then welcome to us and well nothing else to give you support. Thank you.


@5 Hamouda: Other people, other members? I am going to suggest that each of the candidates take the floor and talk a little about their organization, so that those who do not know, those who have not read them, read them, because the documents are very clear, there are things, ask questions if you have questions for the different candidates, but maybe I'll give the floor to carminda a Massa. Meena is not there, but I think there is someone, what is her name? from Asia Pacific/Sushovan. Massa want to start? or carminda if i can





@6 Masa: Thank you all. Thank you Hamouda for the work he has done, which is the document for each other. Here I defend the candidacy of the world convergence of struggles for land, water and peasant seeds. It is a convergence that is a network of grassroots struggle movements, peasant unions, progressive youth from West Africa, therefore from the 16 countries of West Africa, plus Mauritania The convergence is structured as follows: in all the countries of West Africa there is a platform that is made up of several movements, and the convergence is part of grassroots struggle movements, which at some point thought of getting together and fighting against land grabbing, grabbing natural resources, to fight for sovereignty food and against climate change.



So there are several organizations that have come together; and currently and we have carried out many great activities in West Africa, that is why we have carried out more than 4 caravans of great social forums with all the movements, all the traditional leaders. Today we have created the network of traditional chiefs, customary chiefs. We have also created alliances with ECOWAS, which is the religious network. So we also worked, because there was a whole dispersion of social movements that were there. We were the catalyst for the sharing of social movements in West Africa, therefore, with all the experience we have had, crossing countries, solving many problems, we have many concrete results.



Regarding land grabbing, we have recovered thousands of lands for peasants, we have managed to get mining permits cancelled, and we have also included a lot of training in terms of social formation, we have catalyzed land policies where in countries like Mali and in other countries today, we have a policy, the land is recognized for the indigenous communities, and the struggle continues. We are in recognition of peasant seeds, because it is the land, it is water, and they are peasant seeds, these are the three materials of West Africa, because West Africa is agro-silvo-pastoral, then now; We are currently doing the climate caravan, Oxfam and many organizations have asked us to do a climate caravan in 26 countries across Africa.



Others say that we can put together global convergence, but it is a fruit, I tell you, it is a fruit of the World Social Forum, I do not hide that, it came from the struggles of non-Vox and the Dakar forum, several forums that came, we met , and it was created from the World Social Forum in Dakar, where the convergence of Mali with Aminata Dramane, made the trip to go to the African Social Forum in Dakar, and now we have created it. Hence we say that we have to stop dispersing ourselves, we have to stop saying that the water separates, the land separates, but the water and the land are the source of life, and the seeds too, they are our peasant seeds, which are the diversity and the ecosystem, so we put everything together, and that's what unites us today.



It is an organization that has regular meetings, that has members, that organizes great activities, they have seen with 300,400 people that we cross many countries, all of them mostly young people and women, that is why they gave us the leader of the Africana. climate caravan in Sharm El Sheik COP27, I will say that if there are partners, from Egypt who are there, who can help us with the logistics of 26 people who will go there, in Egypt. So it is an organization that has been fighting a lot, we met with heads of state, and even today they called me for the return of the head of state of Guinea-Bissau, who is the acting president of ECOWAS, whom we must meet next week, the meeting is fixed. and aside from that .  Between the 7th and the 8th, we must meet today with President Macky Sall in the case of the climate caravan, and we must also go to Kinshasa for the pre-Coop.


So I'll stop there for a little explanation of the convergence that is alive, it's a living and active organization, even today the women of the convergence have been in a climate meeting all morning, so it was a wonderful meeting and it was just the West African Global Convergence Women's Group. So thanks. I will stop there so as not to waste time with others, but I am ready to answer all questions, which can really come from the network of social movements in Africa and the global convergence of struggles for land and water. and West African Peasant Weeks, thank you. Hamouda: Thank you very much Massa, do you have any questions for Massa? so let's go to the 2nd even today the convergence women have been in a climate meeting all morning so it was a wonderful meeting and it was just the global convergence women's group from West Africa. So thanks. I will stop there so as not to waste time with others, but I am ready to answer all questions, which can really come from the network of social movements in Africa and the global convergence of struggles for land and water. and West African Peasant Weeks, thank you. Hamouda: Thank you very much Massa, do you have any questions for Massa? so let's go to the 2nd even today the convergence women have been in a climate meeting all morning so it was a wonderful meeting and it was just the global convergence women's group from West Africa. So thanks. I will stop there so as not to waste time with others, but I am ready to answer all questions, which can really come from the network of social movements in Africa and the global convergence of struggles for land and water. and West African Peasant Weeks, thank you. Hamouda: Thank you very much Massa, do you have any questions for Massa? so let's go to the 2nd but I am ready to answer all the questions, which can really come from the network of social movements in Africa and the global convergence of struggles for land and water. and West African Peasant Weeks, thank you. Hamouda: Thank you very much Massa, do you have any questions for Massa? so let's go to the 2nd but I am ready to answer all the questions, which can really come from the network of social movements in Africa and the global convergence of struggles for land and water. and West African Peasant Weeks, thank you. Hamouda: Thank you very much Massa, do you have any questions for Massa? so let's go to the 2nd



@7 Diakalia: Did you want to ask Massa a question? ouattara from the Ivory Coast, just a clarification: is it a formal structure, finally established, and that has branches in the different countries, or is it a campaign? This is what I wanted to talk to you about, I don't quite understand the nuance between the two.


@8 Massa: It is a structure that has country platforms, it is a structure that has coordination, that is made up of 5 countries, 2 English-speaking and 3 French-speaking, that has a spokesperson and that has different group structures, a land group, which has an environmental group, and now only a group of women from the informal sector, and a group from the alert system, the group of human rights defenders. Diakalia: oh yes what you did once, you went to go to Abuja to you went to another Ivory Coast exactly that is oh yes that is understood. Hamuda thank you. thanks Ouattara another question?



@9 Pierre: yes, I had a question for Massa; who raised in Mexico the idea of ​​working in the perspective of a World Social Forum in West Africa in 2026; just to know where this idea is; and how convergence works on it.


@10 Massa: Yes, thanks for the question, that's why yesterday I made the mistake of sending to the list (of the Africa continental dialogue preparation whatsapp group) with the names. The convergence has already made an official application for its membership and the organization of the World Social Forum in West Africa. that is the formal request for convergence, that's fine, always on the agenda, and that is our creed, because today we have the capacity, we have the partners, we have the capacity and we are going to accept it. I had started to think, to set up the group, because we have, I was in these reflections, and the group had already started to make the whatsapp group, there I learned with Diakalia that the group (African social forum) is also making it, like this that now, like yesterday,


It is true that after what Hamuda did, if I have something wrong, I write directly, because I do not look with rancor, things are possible, but I am so much in the preparations, Pierre is a witness, so I am involved with the preparations of the caravan in the 26 countries, and I have not seen all the writings pass, that is why I began to put all these names of all the countries of the group (for the session of Africa by continent), you saw that it was a bit like I put the names of the 27 different countries, which are the social movements, with which we are thinking in the forum, then, later, this group will be created, that is why I made this mistake. , otherwise, this work is in progress, this reflection is in progress, but it was I who calmed him down, and who always said: first we must wait for our official adhesion ac is work,with the whole group from Africa, and I discussed it with Mignane.


At the time of the application, I spoke directly with Mignane with all of Africa that we will think of. We did not say that we were going to do it in Mali or Senegal, but it is West Africa, we are going to think now with our elders, with those who have gone before us, and with the news, and now think about which is the right country that can host the forum. Otherwise, really, we are still candidates, and all our financial partners know that we want to apply for the World Social Forum in 2026, others even say 2025. We have no problem: All the partners that finance the caravan are ready to finance the Forum World Social, so we have all the balls, it still remains that the candidacy for the IC is validated, of course, that we are members of the IC and that we are now working with the West African comrades. Thank you very much.



@11 Hamouda: Thank you very much Massa, we all make mistakes, you and me, and the others, but it doesn't matter, the main thing is that you have a great mobilization that will serve us for our continuity in Africa, and for our African Social Forum and for the Forum Social World, and I thank you for all the work you have done, all the caravans and all the mobilization that is being done in West Africa, I encourage you to continue and that we can work with our Friends from East Africa and South Africa, the deep south and North Africa, that would be a great project for us, the social movements in Africa. Thank you very much mass. Is there any other question for Massa? it's good otherwise go to Carminda. Carminda, do you want to talk, please?




@12 Carminda : Good morning everyone. Katalizo is an organization that was created in 2017, with the impulse that came out of the 2016 World Social Forum. It is an organization that is growing and developing, and that is mobilizing many young people in an intergenerational perspective that seems fundamental to us. We have action. We have had actions Already in 20 countries.

We work above all with two lines of action: one of them is building a space for transition, which is this area that brings the actions of the world social forum closer together, and we also work on international education, especially promoting the importance of equity and quality of learning, especially in Honduras, where there is a citizen group that is pushing autonomously. We are supporting this group, just as we are supporting other groups in other countries. 

We are also the fruits of the world social forum, as Massa mentioned a little earlier, we are acting above all on issues of education for global citizenship, we are also working on issues of convergence, with different actors, 

We have different contracts and offer services, for example to Oxfam or other events that want to have a social impact. 

And here, as you know, well, I have this experience of the World Social Forum 2016, we want to join the IC, above all because the World Social Forum represents for us a really interesting alternative, to be able to learn at a transnational level, an initiative that approaches the perspectives, and in which one should, at least, should speak with respect, and learn this international and transnational approach, which is not from another side, then it is the main reason why we want to be in the social forum .

We were quite present at the 2021 social forum, we were 5 people working a lot during the organization of the virtual forum, and this year we reached almost 30 young people, many of them and many of them came to the Forum, others and others came from a little more before, but what gives renewed energy to the Forum. 

If you want, you can see the report on our website, of everything we did during the 2021 forum, the online forum, and we also put out your report from the gaze of the young people on the world social forum, we put it out now after the forum from Mexico. So I hope that this candidacy is considered, is treated with respect, and Well, I'm willing to answer questions, thank you.

Hamouda Merci beaucoup carminda moi j'ai pas de question.


@13 Liege: I wanted to ask carminda a question, I wanted to know, Carminda, because you said that your organization is in 20 countries, I would like to know the following: these countries where you operate, are they affiliated organizations? your organization or not? Or you just did activities in those countries. Because, for example, my organization, FEDIM, is a World Organization, which has affiliated entities from the five continents. They are affiliated entities that make up the network, and I want this difference to be understood, for example, this form of overcrowding gave breadth to the action they carry out. So I want to understand, because, for example, so that we can see what criteria really apply to the organizations that make up the IC, which are organizations that have national international action, that have affiliates. We know, for example, that Rose's organization has affiliates like Paulo Freire and CEAAL, so there are several organizations that work. About me understand if in these 20 countries they have organizations affiliated to theirs, or simply do association work, because it is different, then they are not members of the entity, they are only associations and activities. So we need to know, to understand the dimension of identity, because, for example, in our network, there are nine representatives per continent who make up the steering committee, and I am one of those representatives for Latin America, to understand how it works, to that we see the real dimension of the entity, or if it has a more limited action, I don't know, because we have other international entities that have multiple actions, and that have affiliates, just to understand.

@14 Carminda : Thanks Liege, for your question. Obviously Katalyzo is a small organization, we are not going to deny this, it is an organization that was born recently, that pushes itself with all the effort, with hope and with heart, we have, for example, how I mentioned a little earlier a group of committed people , for example in Honduras. This is like a partnership, we are collaborating very closely, involved in the activities of this group. So I consider it to be an example of our roots in another country. 

We are not a network, we are an organization. So, perhaps it seems important to me to mention it, we are part of many international networks, and we have concrete actions that are in several countries, and above all, we have greatly strengthened each other, during the time of the pandemic, in international, concerted, citizen action, motivating the horizontality of people and citizen organizations and groups, also non-formal, that act within our activities. 

For us it is very important to respect the local word; in different countries, when we say with 20 countries, for me what it means is that we have people in other countries, who take part in Katáliso's decisions, who propose projects, who organize activities with us, and well, obviously our activities are also directed towards international audiences, especially young audiences, audiences that have these international intergenerational relationships, and citizen audiences above all. Well, and that in 20 countries, I could list if you want. We also have available in our report, on our website, a quadrennial report, which includes all our actions since 2017, where our collaboration and our international roots are clearly seen.

@15 Liege: So I still have the same doubt: because for example you said that 20 countries have the situation, they are partners, I would like to know if these people from these countries are part of your organization, or are they occasional partners, because it is different, I am saying that Carminda is not disrespecting her work, it is just so that we have the dimension, because if not the following: for example, my national organization has more than a thousand members, then in Brazil I am saying the organization that is affiliated with the FEDIM that makes up the WIDF? So you have to understand the dimension, see the representativeness, be together with other organizations, which are, above us, to have this dimension of action of the entity, do you understand? Because I can work in 100 countries, but they are not people who are linked to my activity,

@16 Carminda : Thanks liege if I try to be clear in my answers, we act much more with international perspectives than local ones, in reality the projects we have in Montreal are the minority of the activities that we carry out. We have people from the international part of other countries in Europe, in Latin America, in Africa, less, but a little bit, who make decisions about the Katalizo projects. I don't know if that is what the question is asking. They are not organizations that are part of Katalizo. 

We have citizen groups that are part of the dynamics of Katalizo, we are not a network where such an organization could tell you a little bit like CEAAL that has organizations. 

This is not the case, within Katalizo, but what is the case is that we have people who are committed, and who are part of the executive group of Katalizo, and who are not in Canada. There are obviously several people here in Canada, in Montreal, and the great great majority are people who are around in their twenties, between 20 and 30 years old, and we also have many collaborating people in other countries, who take an integral part, who are part member of the organization, and who contribute, from their own perspective, in fact that greatly enrich our actions, the actions of our international organization. I don't know if it's clearer.

Liege Yes tudo bem I answered tudo bem.

QUESTION IS SHEILA KATALIZO REPLACING THE ORGANIZERS OF THE WSF 2016? @17 Hamouda: Thank you Liège thank you carminda. I do not have any question; but sheila sent a question, which I send you through the chat, maybe you can answer it, because she is not present with us, here we are gathered in the Meeting, she had something different than what she had asked this question there, can you? answer her, like this, she is in the chat.

@17A sheila Thank you Hamouda for the documents you sent. I have a question regarding Katalizo. After the WSF in Canada, the organizers started to integrate the IC and this should be done through a civil society organization. In this sense, Katalizo was created. What is being analyzed is the replacement of Carminda by the organization to which she belongs. Am I understanding correctly?

Obrigada Hamouda hair sent documents. I have a duvida in relation to Katalizo. After the WSF in Canada, the organizers became part of the CI and it should be done through a civil society organization. Nesse felt foi servant to Katalizo. Or that the substitution of Carminda by the organization to which she belongs is being analyzed. I am understanding correctly

Carminda : I'm not sure I understand the question, I'm trying to read “in this sense, Katalizo was created, what does it replace?” I'm not very sure I understand the question. The question is whether the organization we created… then I don't understand…; Can someone clarify for me?

Hamouda: I sent it in English, even in English for you two. Carminda :: could you explain to me? Hamouda yes, I'll try the question: I think it asks "after the Social Forum in Canada, the organizers became members, Raphaël and the others became members of the International Council, and she says and" now is that Katalyso was created later . After Montreal, does Carminda want to be replaced by Katalizo on the International Board and no longer on the facilitating committee in Montreal? that's what he understood from the document that we made, because you put the document, you put a parenthesis in the document that you sent, you put in parentheses that you were with Raphaël nanana, and after creating Katalizo, you asked Katalizo to be a member of the board


@18 Carminda : I already understood. The answer is that in reality, the dynamics of the 2016 World Social Forum has its place, I believe, in the international council, and it seems to me that it continues to be represented. So Katálizo's request upon entering the IC does not replace the dynamics of the 2016 World Social Forum. 

In some cases, I could be the same person, a bit like Sheila, that's why I also imagine the question, that she has two hats from two organizations, well, at times, I could have these two hats, but what I would like is that other people also come to take my place, whether it is the two organizations, or it is only one, what I know is my intention. So one does not replace the other.

Hamouda: Thank you very much Carminda. Is there any other question for Carminda compared to Katalizo, or is it good, and we go to the third One Two Three ok Thank you very much carminda.





Il est parti non elle est là, je suis là je suis là Hamouda Hamouda pas toi pas toi Carinda je cherche Sushovan Dhar from the Asia Pacific Social Forum Rosa I can see it here but I don't know Hamouda Sushovan can you speak? Can you speak, did you hear us? ok


@19 Sushovan: hello everyone hello everyone I'm sushovan from the Asia Pacific Social Forum process facilitation committee actually as most of you know the apsf facilitation committee has submitted their offer to be IC member, in fact, the Social Forum process started in the Asia-Pacific region, to revive the process, then the forum in Mexico, and we recently concluded a very successful meeting in Bangkok in August, attended by social movements and groups and organizations from 13 countries, representing many regions of Asia and unfortunately the West Asian participants couldn't be there due to visa issues, but we have social forum members from Palestine and Iraq. I have been actively participating in this. We hope to hold major events in 2023 in Asia,

Meanwhile, we continue with the weekly meeting of the Federation team and also the monthly meeting for everyone related to the Asia-Pacific social form, where the main idea is to expand the membership base. More participants start more people in the Social Forum process so this is what's happening right now, if you have any more questions I'll be happy to answer them. thank you very much

Sushovan: could I be heard? Hamouda: Yes, yes, we listen to you, at that time we ask if people have any questions for you. Rosa hello hello hello Suhovan I'm waiting I tell people if there's anyone who wants to talk

Mike Davis Mike Davis Mike hello.



@20 Mike: Hello everyone, I'm moving on and would like to acknowledge the incredible work that the Asian comrades have done in the last year, and I think it gives us a lot of hope for a global rejuvenation of the world social forum. I hope that Hamouda, myself and the other African comrades can do similar things in Africa. We have set up a WhatsApp group with some teething problems, which I heard they discussed, but the Asia Pacific social forum is really a model for us, in the way that they mobilized, the circumstances are different and Africa has different problems. but we look forward to learning from the experience of working with them, so I'm all for their application to join the IC.


Hamouda : thank you Mike and Rosie 

@21 Rose : Thank you. I am going to speak in Spanish but like Mike, I would like to point out that I think it is very fundamental that the Asia Pacific Social Forum be part of the IC, for all the mobilization they have done, I think it has been impressive, what they have done in that time , the forums that they have organized and mobilized, then, I think it is only an inspiration for social movements and organizations, this movement now, that are preparing to meet, there is a constancy in reflection, in action, in debate. Well that.

Hamouda : I don't know if anyone has another comment on asia-pacific social forum I didn't see raised hands 

@22 Ouattara: I can't follow her. Is there a specific problem? Am I misunderstanding or does Asia-Pacific want to join the Council? Hamouda no, no problem. It's the Asia-Pacific committee of the Asia-Pacific Social Forum, the facilitating committee submitted their application, which I emailed the applications yesterday, so that they have an application to be a member of the International Council. Ouattara: ok Sushovan explained the work they did, and here it is, the discussion, if people have questions regarding the candidacy, like what has happened with Katalizo where there have been questions, Carminda answered, with Mali I had questions , we are for the third candidacy. Ouattara is fine 47mn


@23 Liege: Hamuda, I had a question, you at the beginning of the meeting, you raised a concern about the quorum of the meeting, so I would like to know the following: if we can, with this low quorum, make decisions here, I am in doubt, do you understand?, because we are not going to decide, without a quorum, I would also like to raise this concern because the quorum is low, and I mean we don't even have a quorum to decide, that is my business.


@24 Hamouda: What can you say, Liège? we are not going, because the applications were submitted last May, we have, we can, in any case, from my side, I have no qualms about these three organizations becoming members of the board. We have 23 organizations present at this meeting today, I think we have a quorum; people who did not speak; that they have not been there; they can write…the documents are sent, if someone who has, as I say, does not agree with one of the requests, say so, at the moment there is no person who says that, where we are, I don't know , I give the question to everyone, is there anyone who rejects an organization today?

That is the point, and if there are members who are not present today, who have not been able to come, they still have time to write and send a message saying to block applications, but for the moment, those who are present, we can not extend, because I know that Massa is impatient waiting for an answer for him, because they are mobilizing for the Social Forum. The Asia-Pacific forum, they want to have an entity and all that, that can continue with the work that they are doing, and Katalizo since May, even before, was interested, followed all the forums and all that. If there is someone who refuses one of the three, say so, so we continue.


@25 Ian: there are 23 organizations, and Rosa says, I see a lot of people besides two in the chat, who put their agreement, I think Alternatives and Ciranda, so there are 25: it is more than there is always for any decision we make, Liege is more. 

So if we ask ourselves the quorum question today, we would have to ask it all, every time, every time. So, well, and I think that, as Hamouda says, it was also circulated on the lists, 2 days ago, it was circulated several times, it is no longer new that these three associations want to enter. 

I think that it seems to me that we have to move forward, and well continue with all the work, that I am sorry for not having been very present in recent times, to lend a hand here to Rosy, Hamouda, to all those who are involved, is that I had a lot of work starting another job that asks me a lot, but I think we have to move forward, right? and I think that they are three very interesting associations, very different, and that they bring a lot, so, well, thank you, that's all.


@26 Rita, Hi, I want to congratulate Liege on the question, not on the decision we're making here; because we have three organizations that are going to be very important there, doubts that arose before were resolved in the discussion process, right? But when we have other decisions, with a quorum similar to today's, it is common that the decisions, the steps that are taken, are later delegitimized, due to the level of participation. So this Liège issue also puts us in a forward direction for future decisions, that this quorum, when a meeting is widely called, that this quorum, the smallest quorum of people actually participating, is deemed sufficient to make the decisions of the International Council. .


Because this effort to be in the meetings is very exhausting, on days when others could be in other commitments, we reserve this agenda for the fundamental discussions of the forum, and when they do not agree as a party, who was not present, the one who was present the more he left unhappy, the decisions are delegitimized. So I would like us to have, from now on, an agreement on respect for the decisions taken in "possible quorum" of the meetings of the international council, and on the three organizations, hoping that they will contribute, in this next period, to the discussions that we also have fundamental policies so that the forum has more impact on the political situation. Thank you very much.

Hamouda thanks rita Ouattara?


@27 Ouattara: Thank you very much; I believe that whoever speaks of the quorum, we must avoid taking with us jurisprudence that will reach us tomorrow. I do not remember in the past that for memberships, that the question of quorum is an intangible criterion that must necessarily be taken before deciding. Maybe I don't know, it's nowhere. Also in our text I've seen that it mentions that almost 50% plus one vote is needed for the organization to be admitted, I don't remember that.


What has not been done in the past must not be created now, and tomorrow it will create problems for us. The second thing: we have to be really very practical, very intelligent, as Hamouda has said since the candidacy was launched in May, those who have grievances have expressed them, and I think we have to avoid dragging things inside us, we have to validate the apps and move on to something else. If we want to prolong the thing, and there are people of good will who want to do it, who want to join in, I don't see why we have to procrastinate to prolong it.

Hamouda merci Ouattara, Ian


@28 Ian, I quickly agree with Ouatara : we have to move on. It has never been done; nove or because it is not done now, the fact of being able to oppose exists; if in someone's lists it says “no, this organization never again” you can talk, but nobody did, then it means that, in addition, the people were consulted, the entire IC was consulted. I think that is what is important, that in addition to the 25 people who are here, 23 plus the two, is a lot, especially if there is no one who is officially opposed.

Sometimes, there are decisions, as Liege said, that have been made, and that are shared by mail and by CI, and there we have answers: there are people who say "no, I don't want this decision to be made", but that was shared in the mailing list by Hamuda, and no one objected, so I think… 

Above all, I don't understand: there are three good wills, I don't understand why we have this issue, new dynamics, when precisely the IC is losing dynamics, so let's move on, let's move on, please.




@29 carlos tiburcio Good morning, good morning, good morning comrades, I am in favor of granting the CI. I think it is very important that new organizations join this process; but, and I agree with Liège: a minimum quorum must be established beforehand for such an important decision. When was the last IC meeting that approved the entry of a new organization? When it was? What was the quorum at the time? I don't know, does anyone here know? Maybe Hamuda knows, it's important information. And if we discussed the opposite, the exclusion for some serious reason, of an organization from the IC, would we adopt this decision? With the quorum we have today, I don't think so. Inclusion or exclusion is a decision of the highest responsibility of the International Council.

 ( post meeting note - responding to Tiburcio's question - the last inclusion of organizations was at the January 2020 meeting in porto Alegre - see the transcript http://openfsm.net/projects/ic-extended/poa-202001-extension and http://openfsm.net/projects/ic-extended/poa20-202001-reunion-ci-trancripcion-del-video-dia26-v0 the entities were FME (world forum of education) - Intersindical Confederation - Latindadd see by the interventions @140 @157) - the number of entities participating in the meeting was between 20 and 30 in this meeting)

So, just in favor of having this debate, and that we make this decision before Tunis, we have to move forward, before Tunis, but that we prepare better, convene better, perhaps even include on the agenda some topic that is broadly motivating. . , for the organizations to come, along with a decision that does not seem very complex or difficult to me, but that has to have criteria, so that what Rita said does not happen, and what others said, of challenging the legitimacy of the decision, and of the international council itself.


I propose that we not make the decision today, and that we prepare it before Tunis with a short deadline, perhaps a meeting prior to Tunis, even preparatory to what objectively is going to happen during the seminar, is that it should have days before, or even in Tunisia, but before starting the work, we made a decision to include, or eventually we could show a decision to exclude. I say this so that everyone can think about the seriousness, the importance of a decision like this. Inclusion and exclusion is the ultimate responsibility of the International Council, and I ask again, when was the last IC meeting that included a new organization? What quorum did you have at the time? Thank you very much;

Inclusion and exclusion is the ultimate responsibility of the International Council, and I ask again, when was the last IC meeting that included a new organization? What quorum did you have at the time? Thank you very much;


@30 Rosa :Comrades, the truth is that it makes me a little sad to listen to you, because the compañeros are entering, we are 23 various entities, the IC chat expressed their decision here, Damián de vida Brasil, also ronald from icae, and the three entities both the Asian social forum, both the West African partners, and Katalizo have shown commitment to the world social forum, holding world social forums, articulations, and also mobilizing actions. 

So, I say that a call was made, we gave a waiting time in the whole process of; let's say you could be an assembly member; a summons is made; a while ago and you arrive; Ideally, it should be 50% plus 1 of course, but right now we have participated between 20 and 40 or 50 at times; max, CI Entities,

I do not see why not approving the colleagues have been to the three entities, I think that would give us a point in favor to continue with this construction.

I don't think we have to wait for a larger quorum, when in reality we don't have, they say there are 80, and the truth is I've never seen the 80 gathered in our sessions, maybe 50 maximum, but I don't know.

I say that we approve in this session the accession of the three entities, which are requesting to be part of the International Council of the World Social Forum, and which have actively participated during the last four or five years. Thank you;


@31 Rita: yes, I don't question what Rose is proposing, I just warn: right now we are establishing decision standards, where they are the decisions that must be respected by the entire forum, even with a reduced quorum, which is here smaller than that of Mexico. So I agree that it be approved, but that the Council's decisions be respected, as I said before. But another point arises that we also agree with the decisions made, even if there are objections, so we are also solving a problem related to consensus here: decisions challenged by minorities should also apply to the IC as a whole. We cannot have two weights and two measures.


Rosa: do you want to talk raise your hand


@32 Mike: May I suggest and suggest a way forward? On Monday, as soon as possible, an email is sent to all IC members, all 80, whatever, saying that the IC received and approved the memberships, subject to receipt of any objections. in a week or whatever, in which case we'll hear objections. Not everyone will be here to approve; I really think if we want to attract new members we have to fine tune our act and make sure everyone knows about them because they should because it's been on emails and stuff we had time to google and check and know all comrades too , so let's improve the membership, subject to any objections and received by all IC members, and then we will examine those objections. Thank you;



@33 Ian: I do support Mike's idea, I think it's a good idea, to take it and say that, send an email to the IC saying that the IC that met approved, and that we give a week for or less days, I don't know, How many days do you think, for, if there are objections, that someone shows up, but if no one shows up, within these, I don't know, two days or a week, well, they're approved, and that's it.

To say that it was decided, that the people are here, there was no opposition from these three organizations, and that if someone opposes, so that they can manifest themselves, but if nobody opposes, it is already approved.

And to answer Rita, it has nothing to do with what we are discussing now, with the issue of consensus. 

The consensus was never unanimous, it was never unanimous, many times the minority does not agree with something, but accepts the decision, it is not unanimous, because there is a minority that does not agree. 

So I don't see what this debate has to do with it, I always follow the same thing here; I don't see the value of bringing it here; And well, if we do the quorum thing, we do it for all the decisions of the IC that have already been made, in fact, because every time he makes a decision, it is shared in the mail groups, the WhatsApp groups, and if there is no one who opposes them in the WhatsApp groups in the mail groups, let's go forward.

We always did, the Mexico thing, the virtual forum thing, all of this.

But if a decision is shared in the CI chat in the mail, people oppose it; Obviously we're going to have to go back. It's normal, that's respect; a quorum is not required when we meet; the environment of the whole decision is necessary, the WhatsApp, the mailing list, the method.

That's why it seems to me that Mike's idea is good: we send an email saying that the IC members who met approved, the people who come, and that there is no opposition within the mailing, all that is approved and that's it. 

But that of coming with the quorum no. We always work like this. I think Francine said it the last time that consensus always worked very well that there is an issue that opposes us that it is an issue that we will have to discuss until it is resolved, but that we are on track now is another issue that we have to move forward on. 

So, I don't see why that question is raised again, that we are talking about a single issue that divides us, but all the other issues, we always achieve it, and we always use consensus. So please go ahead, Mike's idea is a good one. It is important to have new people, new blows, there is also the spirit of the CI and the world social forum, bringing people from Asia, Africa, bringing young people, all of that is important, so thank you

Hamouda Merci mon camaraderie Ian la personne Ouattara?


@34 Ouattara: yes thank you: regarding Mike's last proposal, we must avoid taking a step forward and a step back, once we have made the decision today, it is in good faith, because if we are going to make the decision today and open another Pandora's box, and then it will create problems for us, I think that once the decision is made, it is made.

We have had emails, until now those who had to challenge had to challenge, if there has not been a dispute currently, we who are there currently there is no consideration, why make a decision and then open again people just have to protest, I think that is also important to proceed, we validate and then continue, we know that our colleagues have known what they had to do. Where is the problem? the problem of quorum that we are discussing why look for lice in people's hair has not been raised. My position: we take the position, the decision, and then we continue.



@35 Hamouda, thanks Ouattara, I think we've discussed this enough already. Normally, the organizations that are here and that are present, if all of those who are present, there is someone who opposes one of the three candidacies, let us know. If there is no opposition to these candidacies, then we are going to write an email to the International Council, giving them until next Thursday, to say "Here, all these organizations that were present today have approved the 3 candidacies, or there are 20 that approved 3 no we approve that we send and let the members of the Council react.

Just to tell you that, until now, all the meetings that we have had (ok norm for a moment) all the meetings that we have had until now have no legitimacy, since we have never had a quorum, we have never been so many talking, apart from when we were 25 in Mexico, with the people who were online, that's the only one, and we never went over 40 in the International Council meetings, since we started, and we've never had a quorum to discuss and all that.



So the proposal I think is to say that “if there are organizations that are present today at this meeting that are against one of the 3 candidacies, and we send an email to the organizations that were present at the meeting on the 24th, there are 25 or 20 that have decided that the three organizations join, there are two that are against, there are three that abstain, and we send the council, we give a limit for people to respond, and we finish.

Because we cannot continue forever, if we had taken this discussion to Tunisia, we would have had to eliminate all the meetings that we wanted to say that we wanted to talk, that we wanted to mobilize for Tunisia, to have an international reflection. , a reflection on the situation, and we will meet in Tunis to talk only about the councils. If so, we change our whole approach to another approach, we hold an introductory seminar in Tunis with discussions on the Council. favor rule



@36 Norma : yes I understand what Liege says, because I had problems. I remember many discussions, many years ago, when the CI was so big, and we were all involved, let's say, with the forum process. 

Because it seemed to me that the condition, the obligation that, in order to be on the international council, it had to be an organization, international in nature, made up of a lot of local and regional organizations within it, was something that could only be met big NGOs, or the big movements, and that this left as a means outside, let's say, the possibility of being in these big discussions, many mobilizations, organizations, and above all big movements, that because they were more than local or regional or that they were of a large scope, they never arrived and they did not belong to other mother organizations, which were included, we could never hear it.


I remember this, I'm remembering that now, I lost, I always lost. I proposed that these organizations could be on a rotating basis, as guests on the international council. In any case, not that they were part of the International Council, but that they could be invited, with paid tickets to those who came, to talk about those things, that the big international organizations sometimes lose the perspective of the local.

And then, I always lost, because the rules of the forum were as follows: for someone to join the international council, it had to be a mother organization, made up of organizations or delegations, let's say, it's not true, and really informally integrated, in various regions or continents. 

So, what I only want to say is that this has to do with the things that we never close, that is, today we decide something different from the one we decided before, and that is why many of us think that we have to have a thorough discussion about the future of the forum, because everything is very confused, because there are many interests that are turning around, so today one person says one thing, and another says another, and it seems to me that these are substantive issues.


For example, here are procedural issues; for example, the theme of the social forum of Asia, of Africa would be included in what I say, which will be the prior condition of the forum

 but what Liege asked Katalizo is just that, it's all this nothing. It is not answered in the way that it had to be answered in the old forum, let's say, so it was talking about those first. 

Second, they are just reflections that I am making, no, based on the difficult time we are going through. 


Second reflection to Ian, I think that what Rita said, Ian, that we take into account that if we now define that these three organizations enter, despite the fact that there are objections, Liege and Tiburcio for example, we are deciding that the consensus would include being , let's say have internal opposition, and therefore win the majority.


You say no, that there was never a unanimous consensus, because there were always minorities in disagreement who accepted. Well, this is unanimous. What is called unanimity, if not that everyone who is in a meeting accepts what is decided! This is unanimous. If someone does not agree and accepts, the unanimity folds, if not they do not agree and do not accept, it is when we are proposing that there should be other ways of defining the fundamental questions.


Well, then, I am not referring to any particular candidacy, but if the way of proceeding of the International Council changes without substantive reasons, it is so that at one moment, if the quorum is sufficient; for another moment, no, in a At one time it was necessary to have organizations all over the world, at another time no; All of this seems to me to be defined very strongly and as soon as possible.


@37 Hamouda Thank you very much Norma So let's go, because we have to stop at this point; because we have another point. Is the proposal that I have made acceptable, in the sense that we say “who opposes this candidacy” and to send it to the council and it is given until next Thursday, next Friday to people who agree or disagree , who write to us, hoping they will write to us, also because, as I said at the beginning of our meeting, I have sent quite a few messages to which no one responds, apart from three or four people whom I thank again whether they confirm their presence or not I know cadtm, because the Asia-Pacific forum has confirmed that it is compatible with the Asia-Pacific app. Are there those among us who are against the decisions or membership of these groups,



The issue of consensus is not something that is finished, we said that we really have to find a consensus and there is a proposal on consensus, so that we can make decisions. If we continue like this we will end up with no one on the board, because in any case, in my humble opinion, although I will keep quiet and not talk much, but the truth is that it is tiring, when we have meetings like the truth, I do not want to have another meeting, that the truth is that I am wasting my time, I don't even have time to go see my family, my children. So I have the impression that we are going round and round to dissolve the International Council and not move forward, I think to stop the discussions, because we will not agree, it is like the consensus issues, we never reached an agreement on that .

Because if we bring it back to Tunisia, we have to make the decision now, because we don't have a quorum, so I don't know what we are doing here, but why we are here today and tomorrow, and next week, and in Tunisia. So these are questions I ask myself: do we continue the debate or do we stop the debate. Are we accepting the memberships, saying that here are the memberships that have been accepted, and here are the three or four organizations that do not agree, because they consider that there is no quorum, that we have to take this to Tunisia, so it has be a decision. And that we respect it, as we accept the international secretariat, that we accept the dialogue towards Tunisia, that we accept the seminar in Tunis. ian



@38 Ian ; Oui quickly Ian in Spanish. Well let Rita say it; or let Tiburcio say it let Norma say it, clearly, clearly, here I didn't see anyone who opposed the decision of those three organizations, no one! If here Tiburcio, Norma, Liege or Rita are opposed to the entry of the organizations, to one of them, say it clearly and explain why, and there will be no consensus, but for now, from what I see, there is a consensus, because Nobody opposes the entry of any of these organizations, so that they say it clearly, he asked: I want to listen to Tiburcio, I want to listen to Norma, I want to listen to Liege, I want to listen to Rita, that they say “the Asia Pacific forum, I don't want it in the IC “I want to hear that, that they tell me and there will be no consensus, but for now there is a consensus. Thanks.


@39 Mike - just a quick one - remember that the Asia Pacific social forum is a nursery for the forum, for the renewal of the Forum in Asia, which I hope, in 2 or 3 years, members of that Forum will join in their own right, and they have a multiplicity of voices, not all of which are represented by apsf, and I think that's something we need to keep in mind: this is really going to help us expand.


Regarding the quorum, please, we have never talked about it before, if you want to be parliamentarians, there are more than 80 members, but most of those members are inactive. I welcome my comrade Massa and the others, I think they are really going to push the CI through their participation, and they are committed, they are from social movements, and that is what we have to focus on. So please let's move on, we just have enough consensus to agree please.



@40 Massa: yes quickly I think that as Hamouda said what should be advanced, as Hamouda said very true that what Diakalia said is true but as the majority tends to that we have to move forward now we have never done since I have been in the forum as well, and there we have never had a meeting with a quorum, never, I have never seen it, I have not seen a meeting where there is a quorum.



And then many people have their name ai CI, but these are organizations that no longer exist, that only exist in name, let's accept that the world changes, things are in line to change: there are movements that are heading towards decline, and others are at its height, the problem, you have to take all that into account, you have to take into account that there are movements that were very strong before, there was consensus within the movements the people were represented, now that they are members of the IC, but who represents them in the IC, even the one who represents them, is also ashamed to come to defend because their movement does not really exist, it does not exist only in name.



No, we have to understand all that. I believe that I am there as a novox, I am a member of the IC, I defend convergence, because I am active in this, in Mexico it was said that the IC must be revitalized, that the forum must be revitalized, now that we have organizations that come for revitalization , I believe that we still should not go and find exceptions, or issues, that we should not even put on the agenda, the quorum should not make the agenda here, because from Mexico, this debate is ongoing, there has never been a quorum to make the forum, to hold the IC meeting.



I completely agree with Hamouda and this is the only solution today, because I have to speak as a member of the IC. We do the approval of the organizations that are there, if there are organizations that have an argument against one of the three organizations that wants to join, also that they speak, they say so, but if not, no, and as soon as let's agree, let's agree, the report will go eh if we can.

I agree that we can give a deadline of a week until Thursday for people because they have already had the mail, we give a deadline, if we give a deadline until Thursday, then now there is no problem, if there are people who want to react. I think we have to stop this debate, to go to the other item on the agenda, I would really like to propose that Hamouda's proposal, I support it, that we stop this debate, we write that those who are present have joined, those who are not in agree, like Ian said, they immediately say they don't agree, that's put in the report and we send it to others.



Let's stop, we have to evolve, the old school can no longer walk in this world, the world is changing, the struggle is changing, even the system is suffering, and we are changing things, we are fighters for social transformation, and things has to change I would like us to evolve too, and for the IC to evolve in its head as well, we really have to evolve, as long as we don't evolve, we can't walk, we can't do anything without evolving, without having a mental revolution, I really invite you to you, the old class, to join the current system and move forward to change the world. Thanks.




@41 Tibúrcio : I wanted to insist that the question is not “I support organization X”. It's not that problem. We want the organizations to intervene and strengthen the CI. now I ask “is progress made with more with so little quorum, without a quorum is this progress? Why the important decision that nobody here is challenging organization AB or C, what is being challenged is making important decisions with such a weakened participation; when we are in the process of debating the future of the forum, of rethinking the forum... This is a step backwards: instead of her being a mobilizer with more participation, she - he is less a mobilizer with less participation. Rewarding this direct process with such an important decision is not correct, it is not correct, it is methodologically incorrect, it is incorrect as an incentive for participation,



Why, what the CI has done the most in recent times is to postpone decisions”, because the thing was not in it, of course because it was not there because two or three, two or three picked up what I know, more has been done in recent times, and we want to change that. And the way to change is not to reward a representation with little participation, it weakens any decision of such importance, let's make self-criticism: if we did not have the ability to call for a decision, let's make the effort to make that happen.



I am proposing that we make an agenda with an important political issue for the future of the forum, and together with that we put the issue of the inclusion of these organizations, we are going to solve this problem of inclusion in twenty minutes. The problem lies in the misunderstanding of what decision means, a process of regressing participation, recreating criteria. Why can we be… take the decision of the International Council against the candidacy of the neo-fascist Bolsonaro in the elections of October 14 in Brazil? Imagine if you proposed here, Lieja is another Latin American, we proposed in today's meeting a resolution in the name of the CI, in the name of the CI, against the neo-fascist Bolsonaro. Why do you put this, you can't, the IC can't, you can't and all the way back as it was before, so we are not challenging the organizations, they will enter quickly, but I do not accept it to avoid an empty meeting, to make such an important decision. And regression is not progress. Thank you very much.


@42 Ian : I'm going to do it quickly Ian Sorry, we're going to talk a bit about legal matters, but first I'm going to say to Tiburcio, we don't need, we in attac france, we don't expect the IC to strongly support against Bolsonaro. 

Here we are part of a coalition of solidarity from Brazil, with several French organizations of international solidarity, with which we hit hard: we contact senators, European deputies, ministers and everyone, to condemn everything possible against Bolsonaro to monitor the elections, and all of that we do and we don't need an IC statement. We make it strong and it has much more impact with what we can do as civil society to receive is the landless movement we receive the coica the apib we receive the whole world we made them find senators deputies, and we make it strong, and we are going to continue doing it because outside for solar that is even more important: to act, to do, and that is what we do attac France and many others: we do not make declarations, we act So it is a first thing Sorry about that.


Now simply, a class of law right? A quorum was never requested to make a facilitation decision, a quorum was never requested to integrate new members 

Obviously, the quorum was not requested, but there was always opposition, in any case, to transform the Forum, the IC, and all that. 

Here we are making a decision about something that has already been done, in a way that has already been done, so are we legitimate?

What you are a quorum, Tiburcio, Rita, Norma and that is a new rule, it is a new rule, then we would have, all of us here, to reach consensus with this new rule, which is that of the quorum. 

You are asking for a quorum for the decision to accept new members, not to change the IC, to accept new members, which was never done. 

So they are proposing a new rule, which does not exist, there is no consensus with this rule here, because it is already there, so what has to be decided is “do you agree, do you accept these members or not?” 

Later, if they want to propose that new rule, we talk about it, and we see if there is consensus with the new rule, and we see if everyone agrees, right? It is legal, that is how the law works, they cannot arrive from one day to the next saying “ is the rule that applies “no, they are asking for something else. 

So, we are to make the decision about what? this rule before?, but there never was, this rule never existed, this request for a quorum, so now we have to make that decision, that she has been talking about for months, that she has proposed it, that Massa has been using it for months, for example, the declaration in Mexico, it's not new, it's not new, and Katalizo too, and the Asian social forum, has been acting for moments, and doing a lot of things.

So, there is no need to invent new rules, or ask ourselves for the rules, we are talking about a decision, not about changing the Forum, we are making new adhesions, that a quorum was never requested. We are in a facilitation rule, what the IC does, and an extraordinary quorum was never requested for that, everyone's voices were always respected, because the fact that if someone disagrees, we can put it on the table was always communicated.



But for now, what Hamouda is proposing, what Massa is proposing, what everyone is proposing is a good compromise to reach consensus: if there are people who do not agree, let them say so. 


But if you want to vote for a new rule, I'm not saying no, I'm not against it, but let's do it next time, and we'll vote for this new rule, I don't know where you get it from, but if we do it, we do it, it's law, jurisprudence, custom, you call it whatever you want, but that's how it was, and that's how it has to be. I pass it.

@43 Norma: I want to clarify as quickly as I can, because I get the feeling that we are not listening to each other, here it is not a problem that someone has said, objections to such an organization, not because of this.


Basically, nobody said anything about the Caravan, about the African network, about the Asian forum, because it is absolutely obvious that they are organizations made up of lots of organizations from different countries, which is exactly what the old, the traditional world social forum, requested as a condition to enter the CI. 


The only thing that there was today was a question, which was not fully answered, in relation to what the rules are, Ian, they are not exactly new rules, I am talking about the old rules of the forum, which are not the same today, I do not know why.

That is to say, the only thing that happened today was the question to Katalizo as to whether he really had these characteristics, that they were the ones that were requested from the old forum, in order to be on the international council. 

For example, I work a lot with indigenous organizations, and I would very much like them to be part of the International Council, indigenous organizations that are in several, that have a network, in several Latin American countries. I was never able to propose it, because it didn't match the old rules. So the only thing I'm proposing is that we clarify if we continue with the old rules, if we put new rules, or what we are going to do, that.


From today's point of view, I totally agree to wait a week, as Hamuda said, with regard to the most punctual, but I am referring to something that goes far beyond what is being talked about today about the 3 candidacies, proposes of the IC rules that I want to make clear.

Ian : Norma Sorry quickly Thank you very much, or what is the rule you speak of?


@44 Pierre : Well I have been to every IC meeting since 2004 , the IC has no written and approved terms of reference, and the question of quorum has been a question 

relatively secondary, which has been raised in recent years, why did participation drop, on few occasions? 


For example, I remember the meeting in Mexico in November 2018 where there were clearly less than 20 organizations present, not even 15.

People understood that they had no way of making decisions, so it was a meeting of exchanges, but they knew that their discussions would not reach agreements on behalf of the IC. 

After the meeting in Porto Alegre in January 2020, which relaunched the dynamics of the forum a little, there were between 25 and 30 organizations, it is something like today, it was a face-to-face meeting, 

He agreed that he had a quorum, let's say, staying with this idea that the decision that he processed, The only decision he made was to relaunch three groups to relaunch discussions in the forum process, be put in consultation information in the IC list, and that if someone was opposed could be manifested (3 entities were also included, which answers Tiburcio's question).   

I think we are in the same idea, that is, we decide or that we are going to consult the list but that we move forward. 

There is a decision, it will be consolidated after a few days of consultation in the IC, I think that what Hamuda proposed makes sense.


But there are no written rules, it is an element that perhaps we could decide: to make written rules. But this is another debate, that the consensus, that the entire discussion is more formalized, but so far it goes. 


To say that where I disagree with Tiburcio is when he says that including new members is the highest decision made in the IC. No. As Ian said, the highest decision that is made is to change the nature of the IC, change the nature of the forum, that kind of thing, but when you see that the energies that want to enter the IC are positive, that is not no questions, the nature of what we are doing no. 


So, I think that there is an instrumentalization in this meeting of the question of the quorum for other objectives, what is the nature of the consensus and so on. I think we have to separate things: this discussion (on consensus) can continue to mature, but today's discussion, to include new people, new organizations that bring energy to the process, and I would say in a pretty good plan, take it like this With consensus, as Rosa said, no one is opposed. and that there is an online consultation of a few days and that's it.

But the arguments raised today from the group that is relatively identified right? Well, these can be discussed, but I think that today's decision should not be instrumentalized for other things. 

So, I think we are on the right track: no one has opposed it.


Norma said maybe there are objections, about a case, because people there is the usual question: “I don't agree with something, it will be that I am going to leave the process if what I say is not going to be heard”. That is the bottom line, so I don't know if there are people here who are willing to put their presence in the forum in question because an organization is going to be included. Well it's up to them to say. 


So we do what is proposed by Hamuda, and no one here, or someone who has made an objection, puts it in writing, clarifies it about one of those candidacies, but it is clear that the 25 organizations or I don't know how many are present, that they don't It is a ridiculous figure in relation to what has happened in recent months, I do not see any local crisis of representation. These people supported the decision, it is made, a term is given that if there are people who want to make objections on this specific point that these three organizations enter the IC, let them do so.

And later, the discussion on the modalities of consensus continues, that discussion is not denied. Thanks.


@45 Ian : quickly Just a question for Norma, because I didn't quite understand what was the rule she was talking about, if he is the fact of; As Rosa said in the chat, to work at a regional or global level, it seems to me that Katalizo does it, if it is to have entities in several countries, there are many organizations in the IC that do not have them: CRID, Focus puller, Ciranda too, so I don't quite understand.

If that's working internationally and all, I think Kataliza does it, that's all. My question is what the rule is exactly, but it seems to me that it is respected by Katálizo, or how other organizations in the CI respect it.

Norma : I'm not going to waste time, we'll write it later Ian.

Ian: thanks Norm

1h57mn @46 Hamouda: Thank you very much? I think we are done, we only have 2 hours, the interpreters are tired, we are tired of our discussions that will never end.



I believe that the discussion in relation to the CI in the future of the forum, we are on the right track in spite of everything, you know that the objective is this debate there, that we have this debate, that we must get to things, that is what I said Tiburcio, there are things that are true, but there are things that are not true. Because we need solutions, because otherwise we are going to stay, each one, in each meeting, we are going to take this issue out of the quorum and everything, that is how we are going to operate, and all these discussions there, that is why we wanted the discussion that we have since 2 years ago. You brought her Francine, you Tiburcio brought her, so that we could discuss the International Council. We have to review the International Council, we have to review the membership, we have to review the discussions.



We are 150 members, we are not 80, we are 150 members of the International Council, there was, when you do a social forum, apart from the one in Mexico, because it came with the pandemic, the international demobilization, and all that, but in all the councils, the last council of 2018, there were 80 organizations that were present, because people came to the forum, so I think that the members are very tired of the discussions that we have. Because we are not building, we are trying to build something, but it seems that we cannot show it, and that is why it is very difficult to have virtual meetings, it is very difficult to make decisions in virtual, it is very difficult to make decisions in virtual, and that is why it is important that we have solutions.



When Tiburcio, you talk about the arguments that you bring, what are you proposing, what are you proposing so that we can be fruitful in an International Council meeting? What do we have to do? How are we going to do it? so that's the discussion that needs to be brought up and all that.


@47 Tiburcio: I agree with Suya's proposal that we make the decision and consult the organizations that are not present so as not to create a major obstacle, thank you.


@48 Hamouda Obrigado Tibúrcio thank you very much. 



So we are going to write a letter, an email with the organizations that were present, I don't think that all the organizations that are present disagree. What Norma brings in relation to Katalyzo, where Lieja's questions answered by Carminda. We are going to leave so that, perhaps there is discretion, people who can write, I am going to send an email to the organizations, return the documents and that people respond next Saturday, next Friday at the latest, so as not to drag. That's one. I think we're done. this decision is collegiate, everyone was able to discuss, to advance further in this, so we close this point.



Compared to Tunisia, we don't have time to talk about Tunisia, because of all the discussions we had for 2 hours, we can't go any further, because the discussion about Tunisia is going to disappear, I don't know if we should have an ad hoc meeting of the working groups, how we continue the work of the facilitation groups by continent, organize at least the seminars that we discussed and all that, and prepare Tunisia quietly.



Information about Tunisia: you asked us to see in relation to the dates, it is impossible to change the dates. First thing: we have the elections in Tunisia on December 17. Like our Brazilian friends, when they have elections we are all with them and we would like everyone to be with Tunisia at this moment that is going to be painful, because it is going to be a decision, 15 days before the elections, then our presence will give more to our Tunisian friends, the Tunisian opposition and all that. Second point in relation to that: we have promises of financing for the seminar and if we go further, if we go to January 2023, it will end, we will not have financing to carry out the activity or the seminar from Tunisia. So we keep the dates of November 30, December 1, 2 and 3 for the seminar and the International Council. So it is the dates that are taken, we cannot change them. So that's one.



I'll leave it to Rosie to finish with the question of the continents, the dates of the continents, if it is possible to say the dates, I know that Meena wrote that it is impossible to organize the first seminar as soon as possible, because they have a meeting next Monday 26 to discuss this, so I think there are discussions going on, Rosie. .

1h 58

@49 Rosa : Well Hamuda I don't know if we have enough time, we have passed the dates of the seminars that way. The colleagues from Asia said that, well, Meena wrote, that it was too tight for them to prepare for October 6, but I don't know if Hamuda will have time to prepare everything, let me, I'll put the dates again, because perhaps we have to rearrange I put the chat: on October 6 for Asia maybe we can do a barter, October 13 for Africa, October 20 for the Middle East, October 27 for Europe and November 3 for America, and October 10, 17 and 24 november do thematic dialogues .

But hey, we can continue discussing that, I don't know if in the chat, we don't have much time either. 


The comrades from Asia, I don't know if Sushovan is still here?, because they told me it was complicated, I don't know if someone is ready, because we were supposed to organize WhatsApp, Telegram, mail groups, and dialogue by continent. I saw Francine out there, it seems that deciding… we, as from America, are going to meet on September 29. So I don't know if the others have met; I don't know Europe, Africa; But I don't think we have much time.


@50 Hamouda: Thanks, Rosie, we talked, but in the chat, we haven't had a conversation yet with Massa, Ouatara, Mike, Mignane and the rest of Africa, to have a meeting, maybe on Monday or Tuesday, to have our first meeting and discussing how to engage people, and open up and not wait too long on it, in order to move forward. In relation to the Middle East, we are in the process of seeing how we are going to work as well, we already had a meeting in Tunisia, and from there we are going to make a proposal.


Rosie Thank you. Sushovan? 

@51 Liege Rosy can you send seminar dates again?

Rosa : In fact, we send them as the last minute of agreements, 

Liege : But if it changes send us again If it changes please.


Rosa I don't know if sushovan under the hand.

@52 Mike Hi, just to explain: We have created a WhatsApp group for African IC members. I apologize, I wasn't as clear as I meant it to be, so we just released the people who joined us there. Hamouda I hope we can meet on a Tuesday and set a date for a more formal meeting. We need to move on.


@53 Hamouda : Yes that's what I was saying and I think you haven't listened to me, do you hear me when I speak? Yes Monday Tuesday we send a zoom link to have a meeting with our African friends and comrades, to talk about the continental seminar. We can do it, we can already start work, like the rest of the world, there's no problem with that.


EUROPE IC GROUP @54 Ole yes thank you I am speaking in English, I just want to say that before we created a WhatsApp group to talk about the European representation for the secretariat, but I think we can have this group discuss now the European seminar, so i can rename the group, and we can use it for that, thanks.



@55 Rosa Sushovan? Sushovan Dhar of Mumbai. Sushovan Yes, yes, yes, thank you Hamouda I just wanted to say that October 6 will be too short a time for us to decide, so we may need more time to discuss the Asia dialogue, we are, as a facilitation group, meeting almost every Wednesday Next September 26 we will also have a larger meeting of the Asia-Pacific social forum, so we can discuss there and we will inform you, thank you.



@56 Rosa Thanks Sushovan okay

So this first seminar on October 6 we can move it, the Asian comrades are going to meet only the first one, which is scheduled, we can move it or barter with another that is already ready, or if we don't move it for some of the sessions it will remain for thematic dialogues.

Do the others agree? 


@57 Hamouda: Could you suggest or change the dates, as there are time differences in Asia, Africa, the Middle East, Latin America, or North America. If we are able to do, maybe, if we are not able to respect the dates, we can do maybe two seminars a day, one in the morning, the other in the afternoon with Asia in the morning and Latin America in the afternoon, then The hours are suitable for us to listen to both. I don't know, eh, I say this so as not to be too pressed for time, I think it is a proposal that we can make, see the possibility of pairing up and having the facilitation groups speak, first, and start looking for people and speakers on the continents to talk, and organize and send, but we don't give much time, we say by the end of September, each one has decided the speakers and all that, and the date on which they will be.


@58 Rosa : Okay Hamouda. So if there is no middle east. I don't know. if Hamouda already said that the companions of the Middle East are meeting.

CI MAGHREB GROUP MASHREK M/ Hamouda We are going to invite our friends, because this morning I spoke with Mahmoud about the social forum in Iraq, I know that they are with Asia, at the same time with the Middle East, like us, we are with Africa, and at the same time with the Middle East. So we are going to try to fix it like this, to be able to be present in both activities.

@59 Rosa : I think there is a lot of mobilization for Asia, Africa, Europe, America, I think it will give us many bases for our process of restructuring, as an international council, and mobilization at the continental level.

 Well, I don't know if there is anything more to say, perhaps Hamuda is pending to define a meeting of the IC again later.

 Hahaha Let's see if there is encouragement.


@ 60 Hamouda We will start by sending the email already for the question of the memberships and, at the same time, even if I propose since the IC is not a quorum, there are not 50 people that we can decide, we the group that is already there, that is present all the time, because these people, these members who are there, on the 20th and 25th, are the same people who meet at the back of all the councils, there are people who did not come like that, like Gus and the crid, they asked that could not be here today and other people who could not be here today in the meetings.

But we can say that we are the facilitating group to organize the seminar and continue the work. The main thing, everything goes to the board, after that it is our work that counts, it is our mobilization, and us, because if we let go, there will be no more meetings, CEAAL is leaving, there are other things to do, you look for another zoom, somewhere I'm not normally a secretary anymore, my secretarial task is over, we're a collegiate secretary, so we have to activate, what's up, and inchallah everything is fine fix quietly Pierre?.



@61 Pierre: Hello. I had the same question. I agree with the fact that there are 20 or so organizations that are pushing the process, and that the others come when they see that there is a dynamic. I think that is how we can increase participation. What I ask, as Rosa said, what is the next meeting of the IC and about what?


I remember that at the last meeting, of which I made the transcript, it was discussed that Hamuda from Tunisia would send a letter so that the people from the IC would say if he was coming to Tunisia, if he could pay for the trip, if he was registering in Tunisia online , clarify, and that this should be done these days, with a deadline to respond in early October. So we are here.


And there was another point that seemed unclear to me, which was that Hamuda mentioned 20 guests to the seminar who would have the trip paid for, for being invited, and that seemed to me to be ambiguous, because they spoke of guests for the online dialogues, which are people to be selected by CI groups by continent. But these, to my understanding, are not the same as these 20, I don't know when the list would be agreed upon in the IC 

Then or if this plan is going to be maintained, as if the date of November 30 is maintained, the times are already short: there are two months to organize.

Then he asked me when the little letter is going to come out so that the people of the IC confirm their participation in various modalities, and how it is intended to deal with this question of guests at the seminar in Tunisia, yes it can, it seems that it is necessary to speak as clearly as possible, it is a totally different matter from the organizations of the online dialogues.


@62 Pink: Pierre; Look, well, the interpreters, we asked you to be there for two hours. We've already spent two hours, almost two and a half hours. I think they are important issues to address, but they don't give us the time. Pierre, I say we discuss it in the chat. 


I think we have, there is a logistics committee that is working with tunisia, it has already confirmed that CI on November 30, we have the task of reviewing or fine-tuning the guests, I think we are making progress on that.


I would say that between now and September 30 we confirm the date, I say that on October 6 Hamuda already said "let's have two dialogues per week at different times", I think we can agree on it this coming week, in this one that is going to start the next week, and let's do it discussing in the same chat that we have preparing for tunisia. I don't know if they agree to also close the meeting Well like the interpreters I don't know what you think Hamouda.



@63 Hamouda this I agree thank you very much rosi

On peut faire an appeal for a facilitation meeting, for the organizer and to continue the work of the seminar organization; ça n'empêche pas. On n'a pas besoin d'avoir un Conseil international pour ça. I thought that on a l'aval (pink: exact) tout le monde est d'accord pour le séminaire, tout le monde est d'accord pour le programme; et con se cree en envoies a trick dans le chat pour dire dans le WhatsApp du Conseil international, I will say “mercredi nous avons une reunion de facilitación pour discuss, le 30 o le 1er octobre, un trick comme ça”.


@64 Pierre: I would still like to clarify Hamouda: this guest thing was not I discussed.



@65 Hamouda: I'm going to send pierre, the interpreters are tired, we can't go on, it seems that we want to talk, but what I mean, I'm going to send because I've said I' ll send a letter to CI this week, to say those who come, those who do not come.



Afterwards, I invited you, at the time to discuss, and do as I said: proposals and have a facilitation meeting. I'm really sorry, but I respect us interpreters and I thank them, and I'm really sorry, we're sorry, sorry Pierre too.

Rosa : Okay and excuses to the interpreters for having spent almost 30 minutes a hug.


-------------------------------------------------- ---------


------------chat after sheila question to carminda  -----------------------------

@C1 De Rosa  09:57 AM  Msn of Roland Cameron: [9:54 a. m., 24/9/2022] Ronald Cameron: I am sorry, I am not able to participate to the meeting. Je suis désolé, je ne peux pas participer à la réunion aujourd'hui.I endorse the inclusion of the three organizations: Katalizo, Asia pacific Social Forum  facilitating committee, and CGLTE-AO. J'approuve l'inclusion de ces trois organisations : Katalizo, le comité de facilitation du Forum social Asie-Pacifique et CGLTE-AO.

@C2   De Rosa  10:02 AM   ( a liege @ 23)   Estamos 23 organizaciones del CI.  We are 23 IC organizations

@C3  De Ian  10:02 AM  ( a liege @ 23)  es quasi mas que lo de costumbre Liege - It's almost more than usual Liege

@C4 De Rita 10:02 AM   Ciranda é de acordo com a entrada das 3 organizações, especialmente neste momento em que devemos organizar os debates regionais/continentais sobre a conjuntura e o futuro - da humanidade e do fórum. A pergunta de Liège é procedente, não tanto para esta decisão, mas porque decisões do FSM no México foram questionadas por questões do fórum. E outras vezes em que decisões foram modificadas depois, ou deslegitimadas

Ciranda agrees with the entry of the 3 organizations, especially at this time when we must organize the regional/continental debates on the conjuncture and the future - of humanity and of the forum. Liège's question is appropriate, not so much for this decision, but because decisions of the WSF not Mexico were questioned by questions of the forum. And other times when decisions were modified for a long time, or delegitimized

@C5  De Rosa  10:05 AM  Ronald Cameron, aprueba la entrada de las tres entidades.Ronald Cameron, approves the entry of the three entities.

@C6 De Mirek  10:06 AM  Prague Spring votes in favor for the acception of the 3 organizations on the IC WSF - Primavera de Praga vota a favor de la aceptación de las 3 organizaciones en el IC FSM

@C7 De Rosa  10:07 AM  CEAAL aprueba la entrada de las tres solicitudes. CEAAL approves the entry of the three applications

@C8 De Mike  10:08 AM ( a liege @ 23) yes, we have a quorum, moving on  si, tenemos quórum, seguimos adelante

@C9 De Carlos Tiburcio 10:10 AM  ( a liege @ 23)

Prezados companheiros e companheiras, somos a favor de ampliar o CI e que novas organizações se integrem. Mas não vejo condições de tomar essa decisão nesta reunião do CI. É preciso estabelecer previamente um quórum mínimo para esse tipo de decisão. Que se agende essa decisão pra uma reunião do CI prévia a Tunis. Obrigado.

Dear comrades, we are in favor of enlarging the IC and for new organizations to join. But I don’t see how we can make this decision at this IC meeting. It is necessary to establish a minimum quorum for this kind of decision. This decision should be scheduled for an IC meeting prior to Tunis. Thank you.

Chers camarades, nous sommes favorables à l'élargissement du CI et à l'adhésion de nouvelles organisations. Mais je ne vois pas comment nous pouvons prendre cette décision lors de cette réunion du CI. Il est nécessaire d'établir un quorum minimum pour ce genre de décision. Cette décision devrait être programmée pour une réunion du CI avant Tunis. Merci.

@C10  De Rosa  10:11 AM  Vida Brasil, a favor de las tres.   Vida Brasil, in favor of the three

@C11 De Mike  10:11 AM process of information dissemination was observed. Anyone who opposes their membership should be here or submit a statement - se observó el proceso de difusión de la información. Cualquiera que se oponga a su membresía debe estar aquí o enviar una declaración.

@C12 De Rita 10:13 AM   (Resposta a Tibúrcio @29 ) Mais de 80 organizações. Creio que em Monastir Parece que temos uma situação que nos coloca também a questão do consenso. - More than 80 organizations. I thought that in Monastir It seems that we have a situation that also places us in quest of consensus.

@C13 De Rosa  10:13 AM  ( a Tiburcio @29)  Sólo participamos entre 40 y 50 organizaciones.- We only participate between 40 and 50 organizations.

@C14 De Mirek  10:18 AM ( a Tiburcio @29)  With this putting into doubts every decision taken by consensus there will be less and less participating organizations in these meeting because they consider it wasting their time - Con esto poner en duda toda decisión tomada por consenso cada vez habrá menos organizaciones participantes en estas reuniones porque consideran que es una pérdida de tiempo.

@C15 De Rita 10:20 AM  (a rita @26)  Estamos decidindo que consenso não é unanimidade, e que decisões com pequeno quorum devem ser respeitadas.- We are deciding that consensus is not unanimous, and that decisions with a small quorum must be respected.   Nous décidons que le consensus n'est pas unanime et que les décisions avec un petit quorum doivent être respectées.

@C16 De Ian  10:20 AM  no es eso no - ce n'est pas ça non

@C17 De Rita 10:21 AM  Sim, Ian, é disto que se trata. Há objeções que não estão sendo consideradas para obstar uma decisão.  Sim, Ian, that's about it. There are objections that are not being considered to prevent a decision.

@C18 De Rosa  10:21 AM  ( a rita @C17)  Cuáles son las objeciones?  What are the objections?

@C19 De Carlos Tiburcio 10:22 AM  (a rita @26)

E estamos, segundo Rita, adotando decisões de tal importância com esse quórum reduzido. Decisão por maioria, válida pra todo o CI. Não se trata de cada organização que está solicitando a entrada. Somos a favor de ampliar o CI. A questão é decidir praticamente sem quórum incluir ou excluir.

And we are, according to Rita, making decisions of such importance with this reduced quorum. Majority decision, valid for the whole IC. It’s not about each organization that is asking to join. We are in favor of enlarging the IC. The question is to decide with practically no quorum to include or exclude

Et nous sommes, selon Rita, en train de prendre des décisions d'une telle importance avec ce quorum réduit. Décision à la majorité, valable pour l'ensemble du CI. Il ne s'agit pas de chaque organisation qui demande à adhérer. Nous sommes favorables à l'élargissement du CI. La question est de décider pratiquement sans quorum d'inclure ou d'exclure

@C20  De Mirek  10:22 AM I declare hereby the IC not capable taking any decision any more Declaro por la presente que el IC ya no es capaz de tomar ninguna decisión  Je déclare par la présente que le CI n'est plus en mesure de prendre aucune décision 

@C21 De Rita 10:22 AM   ( a Rosa @C18)  Liege e Tibúrcio, em relação ao quorun Cite um exemplo do que voce diz, Ian  Liege e Tibúrcio, in relation to the quorun Cite an example of what you say, Ian

@C22 De Carlos Tiburcio 10:24 AM  Oponho-me a que o CI decida hoje  com essa falta de quórum.  I object to the IC deciding today with this lack of quorum. Je m’'oppose à ce que le CI décide aujourd'hui avec ce manque de quorum

@C23 De Mirek  10:24 AM ( a tiburcio @C22)   The number of members present in these meetings will be constantly dropping down so you would never have any quorum  - I oppose not to take the easy decision now - El número de miembros presentes en estas reuniones se reducirá constantemente, por lo que nunca tendrá quórum. Me opongo a no tomar la decisión fácil ahora.

@C24 De Liege 10:24 AM  Estou de acordo com Tiburcio @C22 - agree with tiburcio

@C25  De Rosa  10:24 AM  Likewise Mirek - asi es mirek 

@C26 De Mike  10:25 AM   If members of the IC do not attend or submit their positions, what can we do?  Si los miembros del CI no asisten ni presentan sus posiciones, ¿qué podemos hacer?

@C27 De Rita 10:26 AM   ( a rita @26)  Creio que estamos testando aqui a questão do consenso. Sou a favor da entrada das organizações, mas me oponho a que esta situação não seja considerada um padrão para aprovar decisões sem unanimidade.  I believe that we are testing the issue of consensus here. I am in favor of the entry of organizations, but I am opposed to this situation not being considered a standard for approving decisions without unanimity.

@C28 De Ian  1026 AM  ( a carlos @29)  Carlos, we are never so much people, we are 25 persons than are agree not persons, organisations- Carlos, nunca somos tanta gente, somos 25 personas que estamos de acuerdo no personas, organizaciones

@C29  De Rosa  10:26 AM ( a rita @C27)   Rita, no creo que esto se convierta en un padrón.Rita, I don't think this will become a pattern/standard.

@C30  De Carminda 10:26 AM ( a tiburcion@29)   Son varios años que no se integra nuevas organizaciones... tendremos que esperar varios años de nuevo para que haya quorum? Es un poco paradójico esperar que el CI cresca y tome más fuerza si no podemos aceptar nuevas organizaciones…  It has been several years since new organizations have been admitted... will we have to wait several years again for there to be a quorum?  It is a bit paradoxical to expect the IC to grow and gain more strength if we cannot accept new organizations.

@C31  De Rita 10:27 AM  ( a rita @26)  São dois pesos e duas medidas para a tomada de decisões - There are two weights and two measures for decision making

@C32 De Mirek  10:27 AM  and the next time there will be even less, they have more important problems to solve than our procedural quarrels - y la proxima sera aun menos, tienen problemas mas importantes que resolver que nuestras querellas procesales

@C33  De Ian  10:28 AM ( a Hamouda @35)   Eso es una manera muy buena de hacer consensus - That is a very good way to make consensus

@C34 De Mike  10:29 AM  If an IC member does not participate in three consecutive meetings, they should be suspended. We don't have a quorum because of inactive members Si un miembro del CI no participa en tres reuniones consecutivas, debe ser suspendido. No tenemos quórum debido a miembros inactivos

@C35 De Rita 10:29 AM   ( a ian @C33)  Sim, considerar consenso mesmo quando uma minoria não é de acordo..Yes, consider consensus even when a minority does not agree.

@C36 De Ian  10:29 AM No Rita para nada  Not Rita at all

@C37 De Rosa  10:38 AM Yes Mirek.

@C38 De Mirek  10:38 AM We can stop this meeting because if we cannot make any decision we cannot decide anything about the seminar in Tunis - Podemos detener esta reunión porque si no podemos tomar ninguna decisión, no podemos decidir nada sobre el seminario en Túnez.

@C39 De Rosa  10:39 AM ( a Hamouda @35) Hay consenso en efecto. Nadie se ha opuesto.There is consensus indeed. No one has objected.

@C40 De Rita 10:39 AM  Eu ja me posicionei  Sobre isso e sobre o modo de decisão - I have already positioned myself on this and on the way of decision

@C41 De Rosa  10:40 AM  Let's take the step to accept them. There is consensus. Demos el paso a aceptarlos. Hay consenso.

@C42 De Rita 10:41 AM  ( a rita @31)  Não tapemos o sol com a peneira sobre a questão subjacente que surgiu aqui. Apenas quero que este modo de considerar quorum - e consenso sobre isso - seja válido para outras situações.  Let's not cover the sun with the sieve on the underlying issue that has arisen here. I just want this way of considering quorum - and consensus on it - to be valid for other situations.

@C43 De Rand 10:41 AM  ( a ian @38)  I totally agree with Ian  if you don't agree, say why with reasonable, valid and concrete reasons so your opinion can be considered and discussed   Estoy totalmente de acuerdo con Ian si no está de acuerdo, diga por qué con razones razonables, válidas y concretas para que su opinión pueda ser considerada y discutida.

@C44  De Ian  10:42 AM  ( a ian @42)  Ademas si, nunca hicimos quórum para tomar una decisión de facilitación…Also, yes, we never had a quorum to make a facilitation decision...

@C45  De Rand 10:42 AM  its an Open Space, for god sake- es un espacio abierto, por el amor de dios

@C46 De Rita 10:45 AM  ( a  rita @31)   Eu ja manifestei minha opinião a favor da entrada das 3 organizações, e também minha opinião de que consenso em relação ao quorum seja considerado nos padrões de hoje - apesar das objeções. Espero estar sendo bem clara.  Apesar das objeções da minoria em relação ao quorum, decidimos que temos quorum (Isto é uma decisões sobre consenso). E não há objeções quanto às 3 organizações. Decidimos isto e vamos em frente.

I have already expressed my opinion in favor of the entry of the 3 organizations, and also my opinion that consensus regarding the quorum is considered in today's standards - despite objections. I hope I'm being very clear. Despite minority objections regarding the quorum, we have decided that we have quorum (This is a consensus decision). And there are no objections to the 3 organizations. We decide this and go ahead.

J'ai déjà exprimé mon opinion en faveur de l'entrée des 3 organisations, et aussi mon opinion que le consensus concernant le quorum est considéré dans les normes d'aujourd'hui - malgré les objections. J'espère être très clair. Malgré les objections minoritaires concernant le quorum, nous avons décidé que nous avons le quorum (c'est une décision consensuelle). Et il n'y a pas d'objection aux 3 organisations. Nous en décidons et allons de l'avant.

@C47 De Mirek  10:45 AM Any quorum does not exist in the IC. If we do not reach this non-existing quorum today we may close the meeting. We cannot take any decision then.- No existe quórum en el CI. Si hoy no alcanzamos este quórum inexistente, podemos cerrar la reunión. Entonces no podemos tomar ninguna decisión.

@C48  De Rosa  10:47 AM (a liege@23)   Somos 28 entidades que se han pronunciado (tres en el chat). Es el 50% más 3.Si consideramos que en el CI, estamos participando 50 entidades aproximadamente.- We are 28 entities that have spoken (three in the chat). It is 50% plus 3. If we consider that in the IC, approximately 50 entities are participating.

@C49 De Bartiria 10:47 AM  ( a rita @31) Concordo  Rita, que nas próximas reunião seja respeitadas as decisões...e não coloquem quórum como objeção - I agree, Rita, that the decisions will be respected in the next meeting... and do not put a quorum as an objection

@C50 De Ouattara 10:47 AM  Toutes mes excuses je dois vous quitter.' J'ai déjà donné ma position, j'approuve l'adhésion des 3 structures au CI - My apologies I have to leave you.' I have already given my position, I approve the membership of the 3 structures to the IC

@C51 De Mike  10:48 AM  (a  carlos @41)   no, this is not acceptable to raise the issue of a quorum - where is your evidence that a quorum is needed?   Carlos, what is your agenda here with an appeal to bureaucratic impediments to delay decisions

no, esto no es aceptable para plantear la cuestión del quórum. ¿Dónde está su evidencia de que se necesita un quórum? Carlos, cual es tu agenda aquí con un llamado a los impedimentos burocráticos para retrasar las decisiones

non, ce n'est pas acceptable de soulever la question d'un quorum - où est votre preuve qu'un quorum est nécessaire ? Carlos, quel est votre programme ici avec un appel aux obstacles bureaucratiques pour retarder les décisions

@C52 De Bartiria 10:49 AM  Exato Tibúrcio @41   exactly Tiburcio

@C53  De Mirek  10:49 AM   Mike, the impediments are not even bureaucratic (since there are no rules to point at) - they are pseudo-ideological  - Mike, los impedimentos ni siquiera son burocráticos (ya que no hay reglas que señalar), son pseudo-ideológicos. - Mike, les obstacles ne sont même pas bureaucratiques (puisqu'il n'y a pas de règles à signaler) - ils sont pseudo-idéologiques

@C54 De Rosa  10:51 AM   Nos quedan sólo 10 minutos para contar con los intérpretes y no abordamos el punto de los preparativos hacia Tunez. - We have only 10 minutes left to count on the interpreters and we do not approach the point of preparations for Tunisia. - Il ne nous reste que 10 minutes pour compter les interprètes et nous n'abordons pas le point des préparatifs pour la Tunisie.

@C55 De Mike  10:52 AM  I think some IC members are fearful of a truly global IC - Creo que algunos miembros del IC tienen miedo de un IC verdaderamente global.

@C56 De Liege 10:53 AM  ( a ian @42)  Sinto muito Ian não é uma nova regra...I'm sorry Ian it's not a new rule

@C57 De Rita 10:54 AM  ( a ian @42) Ian, muitas decisões foram desconsideradas porque não havia "quorum". Foi um argumento até para decisões do México,.Muitas vezes foi usado como argumento - Ian, many decisions were disregarded because there was no "quorum". It was even an argument for Mexico's decisions. It was often used as an argument

@C58 De Ole 10:55 AM ( a ian @42) Precisely Ian - Precisamente Ian 

@C59 De Rita 10:56 AM   Proponho aprovar as 3 organizações, e também que consenso independa de objeções (feita aqui sobre quorum) - I propose to approve the 3 organizations, and also that consensus does not depend on objections (made here about quorum)

@C60 De Ian  10:57 AM  (  a norma @43)  cual es esa regla ?  what is this rule ? 

@C61 De Mike  10:58 AM  which rules? Is there a handbook?¿Hay un manual?

@C62  De Rosa  11:01 AM  (  a ian  @C60)  Creo que estamos hablando de dos cosas diferentes y ya se confundió todo. Una cosa es aprobar o no la entrada de tres entidades, y la otra cosa es hablar del quorum, que nunca se ha traído a cuenta.Creo que la regla es que las entidades que son parte del CI, tengan trabajo a nivel regional o global. Es así?

I think we are talking about two different things and everything has already been confused. One thing is to approve or not the entry of three entities, and the other thing is to talk about the quorum, which has never been brought into account.I think the rule is that the entities that are part of the IC, have work at a regional or global level. Is this the case?

Je pense que nous parlons de deux choses différentes et que tout a déjà été confondu. Une chose est d'approuver ou non l'entrée de trois entités, et l'autre chose est de parler du quorum, qui n'a jamais été évoqué.Je pense que la règle est que les entités qui font partie de la CI doivent travailler au niveau régional ou mondial. Est-ce le cas ?

@C63  De Mike  11:01 AM  that's what I understood Rosie - non-national - eso es lo que entendí Rosie - no nacional

@C64  De Ian  11:02 AM   but is the case of Katalizo no ? what i understood they are working with worldwide networks like the WSF - pero ¿el caso de Katalizo no? lo que entendí es que están trabajando con redes mundiales como el FSM - mais le cas de Katalizo n'est-il pas ? ce que j'ai compris, ils travaillent avec des réseaux mondiaux comme le FSM

@C65  De Rosa  11:02 AM Ok

@C66  De Rita 11:03 AM  ( a pierre @44)   Não é uma instrumentalização, Pierre, é uma constatação de que podemos tomar decisões apesar da objeções, desde que estejam claras e registradas. Minha opinião. Não quero obstar a decisão, mas reconhecer como estamos decidindo as coisas.

It's not instrumentalization, Pierre, it's a realization that we can make decisions despite objections, as long as they are clear and recorded. My opinion. I don't want to impede the decision, but to recognize how we are deciding things.

Ce n'est pas de l'instrumentalisation, Pierre, c'est une prise de conscience qu'on peut prendre des décisions malgré les objections, pourvu qu'elles soient claires et consignées. Mon avis. Je ne veux pas entraver la décision, mais reconnaître comment nous décidons des choses.

@C67 De Ian  11:03 AM  pero Rita usted tiene objecciones con la entrada de una de esas organizaciones ? Si si, cual ?  But Rita, do you have objections to the entry of one of these organizations? If yes, which one?

@C68  De Rita 11:04 AM   Já coloquei minha opinião sobre isso, sou a favor. Ainda que uma minoria faça objeções em relação a tomada de decisão.Mas que essas objeções sejam consideradas como não impeditivas do consenso.   I've already put my opinion on this, I'm in favor. Even if a minority object to decision making. But let these objections be considered as not impeding consensus.

@C69  De Rita 11:08 AM  ( a Hamouda @46)  Exatamente Hamouda, temos enfrentado esse tipo de dificuldade para qualquer decisão. E precisamos superar  .Exactly Hamouda, we have faced this kind of difficulty for any decision. And we need to get over it.

@C70 De Mirek  11:08 AM  we have just lost 2 hours on a matter which was decided in 15 minutes and then put into doubts as always - acabamos de perder 2 horas en un asunto que se decidió en 15 minutos y luego poner en duda como siempre

@C71 De Rosa  11:09 AM  - Yes Mirek. Eso parecía tan sencillo.  That seemed so simple.

@C72 De Liege 11:10 AM  - ( a Hamouda @48?)  Eu também tenho duvidas sobre Katalizo. Não votarei hoje pelo seu ingresso ao CI.- I also have doubts about Katalizo. I will not vote today for your admission to the IC.

@C73 De Rosa 11:11 AM  -  IPF se manifiesta a favor de la entrada de las tres.  IPF is in favor of the entry of the three.