This is what I last sent, by the way:
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________
Dear Tristan,
Consensus appears to be against the collaboration of the DGAB symposium and ImmInst.
There seem to be (albeit unfounded) fears at your end that ImmInst is not sufficiently scientific, and Klaus Sames (when speaking with Sebastian Sethe) seemed not only of this impression but also of the impression that we had already formally agreed on a collaboration.
I had thought I had made it clear that it'd still need to be voted on at our end and anything I said in the meantime was merely contingent possibilities; I apologise if I did not communicate sufficiently clearly in this regard.
This, coupled with the likelihood of language-based inconveniences, and that you suggested ImmInst bringing only about two speakers, make official collaboration for this event seem quite unlikely.
If you are in agreement, I'd like to draw such ideas to a close and say that we're now (in a polite and friendly manner) disinclined to collaborate in the manner previously proposed.
This does not affect myself coming over to speak, or Sebastian unless he says otherwise
Regards to withdrawing from doing a joint conference, I do not in this email speak on behalf of ImmInst, because I haven't put it to a Board vote, but I can speak on behalf of the ImmInst events planning committee, whose Chair is Sven Bulterijs, and which is unanimous in this opinion.
I hope that this does not inconvenience you, which hopefully it shouldn't if you understood correctly from my previous words couched with words such as "contingently".
Did you find financial sponsors of the event (aside from ImmInst who would share costs if participating of course but is unlikely to assist otherwise)?
Eternally,
David
This topic is locked
