<html xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Helvetica;
panose-1:2 11 5 4 2 2 2 2 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Gulim;
panose-1:2 11 6 0 0 1 1 1 1 1;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Malgun Gothic";
panose-1:2 11 5 3 2 0 0 2 0 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:GulimChe;
panose-1:2 11 6 9 0 1 1 1 1 1;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Malgun Gothic";}
@font-face
{font-family:Gulim;
panose-1:2 11 6 0 0 1 1 1 1 1;}
@font-face
{font-family:GulimChe;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
text-align:justify;
text-justify:inter-ideograph;
text-autospace:none;
word-break:break-hangul;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"맑은 고딕",sans-serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#954F72;
text-decoration:underline;}
pre
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"\BBF8\B9AC \C11C\C2DD\C774 \C9C0\C815\B41C HTML Char";
margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:GulimChe;}
span.HTMLChar
{mso-style-name:"\BBF8\B9AC \C11C\C2DD\C774 \C9C0\C815\B41C HTML Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"\BBF8\B9AC \C11C\C2DD\C774 \C9C0\C815\B41C HTML";
font-family:GulimChe;}
span.apple-style-span
{mso-style-name:apple-style-span;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;}
/* Page Definitions */
@page WordSection1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:3.0cm 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style></head><body lang=KO link=blue vlink="#954F72"><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt'>Dear All, <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt'>I am also in favour of disclosing the votes results publically for both stage 1 and 2. This will increases transparency and will eliminate unnecessary misunderstanding around bidding process. Also this could be a part of RfP each year. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt'>Kind regards, <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>신상희 드림<span lang=EN-US> <br>---<br>Shin, Sanghee<br>Gaia3D, Inc. - The GeoSpatial Company<br>http://www.gaia3d.com <o:p></o:p></span></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"굴림",sans-serif'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div style='mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm'><p class=MsoNormal style='border:none;padding:0cm'><b><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>보낸 사람<span lang=EN-US>: </span></span></b><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt'><a href="mailto:shfeldman@gmail.com">Steven Feldman</a><br></span><b><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>보낸 날짜<span lang=EN-US>: </span></span></b><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt'>2016</span><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>년<span lang=EN-US> 12</span>월<span lang=EN-US> 28</span>일 수요일 오후<span lang=EN-US> 5:29<br></span><b>받는 사람<span lang=EN-US>: </span></b><span lang=EN-US><a href="mailto:conference_dev@lists.osgeo.org">conference</a><br></span><b>제목<span lang=EN-US>: </span></b><span lang=EN-US>Re: [OSGeo-Conf] Should cities bidding for FOSS4G be notified of votecount?<o:p></o:p></span></span></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"굴림",sans-serif'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal align=left style='text-align:left;text-autospace:ideograph-other;word-break:keep-all'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"굴림",sans-serif'>I think votes should be shared publicly. Openness in our decision making process should be a guiding principle.</span><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"굴림",sans-serif'><o:p></o:p></span></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"굴림",sans-serif'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"굴림",sans-serif'>Perhaps the CC should review this as part of the preparation for the RfP each year. <o:p></o:p></span></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><span class=apple-style-span><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black'>______</span></span><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black'><br><span class=apple-style-span>Steven</span><br><br><br></span><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"굴림",sans-serif'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"굴림",sans-serif'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><div><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"굴림",sans-serif'>On 27 Dec 2016, at 02:29, Cameron Shorter <<a href="mailto:cameron.shorter@gmail.com"><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>cameron.shorter@gmail.com</span></a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"굴림",sans-serif'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"굴림",sans-serif'>Conference committee,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"굴림",sans-serif'>Should vote counts for cities bidding for FOSS4G be shared, either publicly or privately?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"굴림",sans-serif'>This question is applicable for both stage 1 and stage 2 voting.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"굴림",sans-serif'>Options suggested so far:<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"굴림",sans-serif'>1. Results of vote are publicly announced, number of votes for each city is not shared.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"굴림",sans-serif'>2. Additionally, each city is privately notified of votes for each city.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"굴림",sans-serif'>3. Additionally, votes for each city is shared publicly.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"굴림",sans-serif'>--<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"굴림",sans-serif'>This question was raised while refining FOSS4G committee discussions. (Discussions were initially private to reduce email fatigue). Discussion so far is shared below.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"굴림",sans-serif'>I'll hold this thread open for two weeks for discussion, until 10 Jan, then raise a motion to be voted on.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"굴림",sans-serif'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"굴림",sans-serif'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"굴림",sans-serif'>On 24/12/2016 5:48 AM, Cameron Shorter wrote:<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"굴림",sans-serif'>Venka,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"굴림",sans-serif'><snip><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"굴림",sans-serif'>With regards to publishing the results of FOSS4G votes, I suggest that this should be described in the FOSS4G RFP document rather than here. (We should only describe in one place, and it should be easily found by cities looking to vote).<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"굴림",sans-serif'>I agree it is a topic worth discussing and suggest we should take the conversation to the public list. I assume that you'd all be ok with me sharing your responses on this thread publicly?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"굴림",sans-serif'>A 3rd option is to privately share number of votes for each city with the city, but publicly only declare successful bids.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"굴림",sans-serif'><snip> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"굴림",sans-serif'>Cheers, Cameron<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"굴림",sans-serif'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"굴림",sans-serif'>On 24/12/2016 4:26 AM, Steven Feldman wrote:<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><pre><span lang=EN-US>Good point Eli</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>Open or closed voting or even a change in process should be for the CC to decide on a year by year basis</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>Regards</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>Steven</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>+44 (0) 7958 924101</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>Sent from my iPhone</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></pre><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><pre><span lang=EN-US>On 23 Dec 2016, at 17:18, Eli Adam <a href="mailto:eadam@co.lincoln.or.us"><eadam@co.lincoln.or.us></a> wrote:</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>Some people have argued that the bidding process is over-competitive</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>and leads to a lot of work for an unsuccessful bid (only one bid will</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>be successful) and that we would be better off with a different</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>selection method that doesn't have multiple LOCs putting a lot of work</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>into an unsuccessful bid. I'm not sure that I see a clearly better</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>way while LOCs are still almost solely responsible for the success of</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>the conference. Getting voted out in stage 1 could be better for</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>community morale than getting voted out in stage 2.</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>I'm see both sides to public and private votes. I see both sides to</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>our current bidding method or another which doesn't have multiple LOCs</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>compete for one conference. I'm not sure which is better and don't</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>have a strong opinion on either right now. Both of these are leading</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>away from the current topic of the Conference Committee process.</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>Do we want to resolve the public or private nature of stage 1 and</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>stage 2 FOSS4G selection as part of the Conference Committee process?</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>Could that be left open and determined each year or at a later time?</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>Best regards, Eli</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 8:58 AM, Maria Antonia Brovelli</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US><a href="mailto:maria.brovelli@polimi.it"><maria.brovelli@polimi.it></a> wrote:</span></pre><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><pre><span lang=EN-US>In my opinion we have to evaluate if those numbers are useful for the</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>proposers or can be demotivating. Just an example: if we have two proposals,</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>one very good and the second which appears excellent, the vote can happen to</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>be completely unbalanced toward the latter proposal and the former proposers</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>can become demotivated and sad because of the low rank reached. A proposal</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>is a common fruit of a local community, which proudly wants to be</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>protagonist of our global activity. Is the count useful for the community?</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>Are there other points of view that I'm not able to see?</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>Best!</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>Maria</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>Inviato dal mio dispositivo Samsung</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>-------- Messaggio originale --------</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>Da: Eli Adam <a href="mailto:eadam@co.lincoln.or.us"><eadam@co.lincoln.or.us></a></span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>Data: 23/12/16 17:23 (GMT+01:00)</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>A: Venkatesh Raghavan <a href="mailto:raghavan@media.osaka-cu.ac.jp"><raghavan@media.osaka-cu.ac.jp></a></span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>Cc: Steven Feldman <a href="mailto:shfeldman@gmail.com"><shfeldman@gmail.com></a>, Cameron Shorter</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US><a href="mailto:cameron.shorter@gmail.com"><cameron.shorter@gmail.com></a>, Maria Antonia Brovelli</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US><a href="mailto:maria.brovelli@polimi.it"><maria.brovelli@polimi.it></a></span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>Oggetto: Re: Revised conference committee processes</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>In my memory (I didn't bother to check the archives), stage 1 was not</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>revealed until recently. However, stage 2 was often revealed because</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>it was a tie. Even in cases that it wasn't a tie I seem to recall</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>stage 2 results sometimes being public. I don't have a strong</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>preference either way, although see Venka's point for stage 1.</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>Best regards, Eli</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 4:35 AM, Venkatesh Raghavan</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US><a href="mailto:raghavan@media.osaka-cu.ac.jp"><raghavan@media.osaka-cu.ac.jp></a> wrote:</span></pre><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><pre><span lang=EN-US>Steven,</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></pre><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><pre><span lang=EN-US>On 12/23/2016 9:14 PM, Steven Feldman wrote:</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>Venka</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>I do not understand why we would want to keep the number of votes cast in</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>stage 1 and 2 secret? It doesn</span>’<span lang=EN-US>t feel a very transparent way to determine</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>one of the most important decisions that OSGeo makes each year.</span></pre></blockquote><pre><span lang=EN-US>The number of votes received by bidding teams was never made public</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>until the 2018 bid (and there was no issue about that). One of the main</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>reason for not making the votes received by teams in stage-1 is</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>to keep the competition alive or the second 2.</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>You may recall that the chair of the Thai-team who withdrew from the stage</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>2 bid also suggested something to the similar effect.</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>Transparency in the FOSS4G selection process is necessary and has always</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>existed,</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>but I do not think that declaring number of votes is necessary and was</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>never</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>done</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>(except for the 2018 bid).</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>Best</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>Venka</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>[1]</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US><a href="https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/conference_dev/2016-October/004127.html">https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/conference_dev/2016-October/004127.html</a></span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></pre><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><pre><span lang=EN-US>Can you explain?</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>______</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>Steven</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></pre><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><pre><span lang=EN-US>On 23 Dec 2016, at 11:38, Venkatesh Raghavan</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US><a href="mailto:raghavan@media.osaka-cu.ac.jp"><raghavan@media.osaka-cu.ac.jp></a> wrote:</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>Hi Cameron and all,</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US><snip></span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>Regarding the FOSS4G selection, I would like to</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>suggest that the number of votes received by</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>each team should never be declared and only</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>know to the CRO. It is adequate to declare the</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>teams that are short-listed in Stage-1, without</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>mentioning which team got how many votes.</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>Also, the ultimate winner is stage-2 can be declared</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>without revealing the number of votes received.</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>Best</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>Venka</span></pre></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"굴림",sans-serif'><br><br><o:p></o:p></span></p><pre><span lang=EN-US>-- </span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>Cameron Shorter</span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>M +61 419 142 254</span></pre></div><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"굴림",sans-serif'>_______________________________________________<br>Conference_dev mailing list<br><a href="mailto:Conference_dev@lists.osgeo.org"><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>Conference_dev@lists.osgeo.org</span></a><br>http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev<o:p></o:p></span></p></div></blockquote></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"굴림",sans-serif'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div></body></html>