Re: [Origami] The Third Joisel Award - Voting is Open

[Lorenzo via Origami]

Dear Hans, dear Laura, stimulating replies, yours.
Thanks Ilan for the clarification.

Here are my comments, long comments :(

Hans, first of all, please don't take this personally, because I used "if
you think..." combined with harsh tones. I wasn't referring to you, it was
my way of saying "if someone thinks...".

I well know (and I agree) that most of the time we all inherently separate
the artifact from the creator, in any field, in any art form or production.
Although it makes sense at the level of mass consumption (in which numbers
count almost exclusively), this for me does not help to promote, support
and enhance art in general, and artifacts in particular. For this reason,
while acknowledging that knowing the author (writer for a book, director
for a film, creator for an origami...) doesn't change anything for most of
us, I will always oppose the tendency to put secondly the identity of those
who are behind a creation, of any kind.
For me, the only way to promote something is to promote who (or what)
creates. All the rest is sterile, pure and unique exercise in style, an end
in itself.
In the case of the competition in question, therefore I wonder what it can
lead to origami itself, a competition that ignores the creator, and focuses
on the final result. I don't understand its meaning, and for me this is,
somehow (at the end) to the detriment of Origami.

The last ten years of my life have been dedicated to frequenting
contemporary art, between large international fairs and important European
galleries, and the first thing that greets me when I approach a work at Art
Basel is the gallery owner who begins by speaking to me of the artist and
of the genesis of the work, even before the art piece in itself. And this
is how I became terribly passionate about contemporary art, which tends not
to be understood by contemporaries themselves, precisely because they don't
know how to approach it, they are not helped, guided in this (as happened
to me).
I learned that there is no work without knowing its creator, there is no
film without knowing the director or screenwriter, because for me even the
mere technique is the fruit of the creative process (and the latter is
strictly personal, nominal).

Regarding the bias, I believe that what is called prejudice for me is, on
the contrary, the necessary completion, is part of the artifact, because in
my view you will never be able to separate creation by creator, without
subtracting something (value?) from the creation.
Let me give you a rather clear example. One of the artists who most excites
me is Joseph Beuys (moreover - pure coincidence - born and lived in the
same city where I have lived for 7 years, and his family home at the time
is 100 meters from my house). Beuys joined the Nazi youth, and went to war
fighting for Nazism. And this is also what I want to know, because in this
way I can form an opinion on his artistic development and on why he managed
to interpret artistically those 70s and 80s so intensely and well. Anyone
could have done his works (as they always say in the field of contemporary
art), but at that time he only did them, and for me it is essential to
understand why.
Of course, I don't go that far in origami, I'm much less involved and
committed, and to me, probably, the name of the creator of a model will say
little, but it doesn't matter, because the fact remains that it is only
knowing the author that I will be able to grow my knowledge and passion for
Origami.

As for what "art" is, I don't think it's relevant, nevertheless here I
would like to be clear: I speak of "origami art" only for convenience, for
simplicity, because everyone uses this definition, but I really don't
consider Origami at all as art. For me it is a sophisticated and very
complex and intriguing craftsmanship, but craftsmanship remains, because I
really don't think I'm able to identify any artistic and expressive path in
origami, as I know it when I look at the forms of art that I know and that
they fascinate me.

In the first part of Laura's email, I perceive a sort of importance of the
creator's identity and She might regret not having paid enough attention to
it at the time. Here, this is precisely one of the things that I consider
very important: to raise awareness of the knowledge of who is behind a
work, in all their life and personality. And since this is a very
complicated path, it is essential that this type of origami activism is
alive and growing.

Regards,
Lorenzo



On Mon, 21 Aug 2023 at 15:19, Papirfoldning.dk 
wrote:

> You might refer to the opportunity for the author to submit its work
> anonymously, which is surely fair and which is much different than
> something decided as general rule for the competition.
>
> Also that, but not primarily.
>
> Furthermore, there's a big misunderstanding about "bias": when I judge an
> artifact I like to do that in a certain context, and the context includes
> (among some aspects) the identity of the creator. This 

Re: [Origami] The Third Joisel Award - Voting is Open

[Ilan Garibi via Origami]

Dear friends and art lovers,

We thank you for raising this issue and creating a discussion about that
aspect of the competition.
The original idea was to put the models to the test, and not the creators.
We definitely cannot say for sure if there is anything else in the world as
such, but it was not a parameter in the decision-making - we truly wanted
to choose the *work *and not the *artist*. We do not nominate the artist of
the year, but the creation itself - the most artistic model, or the best
folding sequence.

Of course, this is only our third year in running the award and as we
always wish to get better, we have open ears for any remark. We will
discuss this issue in the CFC monthly meetings and between ourselves, to
see if there is a better way to make it happen.

We do not assume anything about our voters. We do not state this anonymity
is to avoid unwanted bias or misconduct of any kind. We just wanted you to
vote for the work and not its creator.
For this event, we will not change the rules, of course.

For us, Art is undefinable. Please show us a definition and we will show
you a work that does not answer that, and still people will call it art.
For many people, art is whatever is hung on the wall and evokes some
feelings inside them. Those feelings can happen even if you do not know who
created that. In many cases, having the name there does not change the fact
you do not know who made this work. To see that the artist is Mankel
Ibrahim Saada near a painting of the sunset over Fuji does not change a lot
when you try to judge what you feel about it.

I hope you understand us better now.

Ilan and Nicolas


On Mon, Aug 21, 2023 at 5:01 PM Laura R via Origami <
origami@lists.digitalorigami.com> wrote:

> I had my reservations about chiming in initially, but this conversation
> has truly evolved into something intriguing.
>
> Back when I was just a young girl in the early 60s, I delved into the
> world of origami using the limited books available in the market. Those
> books didn't bear the names of authors, but that didn't bother me much, as
> my focus was solely on deciphering the diagrams. It was only later in life
> that I discovered Isao Honda had penned those books (though to what extent
> remains a mystery; it might have been a fusion of his ideas and the
> publisher's graphic team).
>
> Moving into the 70s, I began amassing books by Robert Harbin and a handful
> of other origami authors. It's still quite astonishing to me that I managed
> to retain the names etched on those covers, enough to refer to the books by
> the author's name. For instance, I'd say, "Oh, this is the Kasahara book,"
> or "Here's the Harbin book," and so on. Quite a feat, I must say.
>
> However, I didn't pay heed to the names that Harbin so meticulously
> included to credit the creators of those models. If I had taken the time to
> read those names, I would've been taken aback to discover, for example,
> that an Argentine artist from my own country, Ligia Montoya, held a special
> place as one of Harbin's favored sources for captivating designs.
>
> So, that's how things were during my formative teenage and early adult
> years – rather oblivious, one might say.
>
> And this is where I connect what I'm saying with Lorenzo's question. How
> many artists can I recognize in the grid provided by CFC? Quite a few,
> right? Therefore, the purpose of keeping the artists anonymous becomes
> diluted (by 30%, 50%, 10%?) It's not about the percentage; what matters is
> that the condition of anonymity doesn't apply equally to everyone. It might
> be worth asking the contest organizers if they think this undermines the
> proposal. Even if they haven't noticed it, voters might feel somewhat
> bothered when they "discover" artists who are supposed to remain anonymous.
>
> In other global competitions where anonymity is a requirement, it might be
> more challenging to discern the artist's touch. For instance, university
> art contests, international fair contests involving young individuals
> starting their artistic careers, and primarily in literature competitions.
>
> Lastly, let's consider an extreme and theoretical example: the contest
> aims to decide between two origami pieces. Both are submitted anonymously.
> However, one is easily recognizable, while the other is not. Does the
> condition of anonymity hold true in this case? If not, from what point
> onward would it be appropriate for the contest organizers to include the
> anonymity requirement for participants?
>
> Laura Rozenberg
>
>
> On Aug 21, 2023, at 10:12 AM, Papirfoldning.dk 
> wrote:
>
> You might refer to the opportunity for the author to submit its work
> anonymously, which is surely fair and which is much different than
> something decided as general rule for the competition.
>
> Also that, but not primarily.
>
> Furthermore, there's a big misunderstanding about "bias": when I judge an
> artifact I like to do that in a certain context, and the context 

Re: [Origami] The Third Joisel Award - Voting is Open

[Laura R via Origami]

I had my reservations about chiming in initially, but this conversation has 
truly evolved into something intriguing.
Back when I was just a young girl in the early 60s, I delved into the world of 
origami using the limited books available in the market. Those books didn't 
bear the names of authors, but that didn't bother me much, as my focus was 
solely on deciphering the diagrams. It was only later in life that I discovered 
Isao Honda had penned those books (though to what extent remains a mystery; it 
might have been a fusion of his ideas and the publisher's graphic team).
Moving into the 70s, I began amassing books by Robert Harbin and a handful of 
other origami authors. It's still quite astonishing to me that I managed to 
retain the names etched on those covers, enough to refer to the books by the 
author's name. For instance, I'd say, "Oh, this is the Kasahara book," or 
"Here's the Harbin book," and so on. Quite a feat, I must say.
However, I didn't pay heed to the names that Harbin so meticulously included to 
credit the creators of those models. If I had taken the time to read those 
names, I would've been taken aback to discover, for example, that an Argentine 
artist from my own country, Ligia Montoya, held a special place as one of 
Harbin's favored sources for captivating designs.
So, that's how things were during my formative teenage and early adult years – 
rather oblivious, one might say.
And this is where I connect what I'm saying with Lorenzo's question. How many 
artists can I recognize in the grid provided by CFC? Quite a few, right? 
Therefore, the purpose of keeping the artists anonymous becomes diluted (by 
30%, 50%, 10%?) It's not about the percentage; what matters is that the 
condition of anonymity doesn't apply equally to everyone. It might be worth 
asking the contest organizers if they think this undermines the proposal. Even 
if they haven't noticed it, voters might feel somewhat bothered when they 
"discover" artists who are supposed to remain anonymous.
In other global competitions where anonymity is a requirement, it might be more 
challenging to discern the artist's touch. For instance, university art 
contests, international fair contests involving young individuals starting 
their artistic careers, and primarily in literature competitions.
Lastly, let's consider an extreme and theoretical example: the contest aims to 
decide between two origami pieces. Both are submitted anonymously. However, one 
is easily recognizable, while the other is not. Does the condition of anonymity 
hold true in this case? If not, from what point onward would it be appropriate 
for the contest organizers to include the anonymity requirement for 
participants?

Laura Rozenberg

> On Aug 21, 2023, at 10:12 AM, Papirfoldning.dk  wrote:
> 
>> You might refer to the opportunity for the author to submit its work 
>> anonymously, which is surely fair and which is much different than something 
>> decided as general rule for the competition.
> Also that, but not primarily. 
> 
>> Furthermore, there's a big misunderstanding about "bias": when I judge an 
>> artifact I like to do that in a certain context, and the context includes 
>> (among some aspects) the identity of the creator. This does not definitely 
>> lead to a bias, this lead to a better understanding of the genesis of the 
>> piece I'm going to vote.
>> In my opinion, if anyone thinks to be able to assign a fair "vote" without 
>> contextualising with the author identity and background, well to me it's at 
>> least naive.
>> 
>> Voting for an artifact is not like voting for the better colour for the 
>> façade of a public building.
>> 
>> Does anyone of you like contemporary art and visit fairs, exhibitions, 
>> galleries and so on?
>> I can assure you can find a "pole stuck in the ground" and quoted hundreds 
>> thousands dollars, because it comes from a whole artistic path of the 
>> artist. And it's not just "because the market".
> Certainly, it may be relevant to include the artist's background and 
> motivation in the analysis of their artworks, and I fully agree that for some 
> pieces of art the value lies solely with the artist and not with the work. 
> Which may lead to high prices, or conversely in extreme cases to cancelling 
> the art works or even destroying them. 
> 
> It is also possible to analyse a piece of art without knowing anything about 
> the artist. Some arts people seem to believe that is main or even only right 
> way to do it.
> 
>> In other word, if you think you can "detach" a piece of art from its 
>> creator, and still be able to judge it, well... to me you have no any idea 
>> of what art is.
> Fair enough. Personally, I like to read books based on their contents, seeing 
> films without knowing the actor or instructor names, and as for paintings, 
> I'm pretty sure that most people appriciate art as is, and not due to the 
> painter's name, and yes, I acknowledge that "most people" at best have a 
> 

Re: [Origami] The Third Joisel Award - Voting is Open

[Papirfoldning.dk]

> You might refer to the opportunity for the author to submit its work 
> anonymously, which is surely fair and which is much different than something 
> decided as general rule for the competition.
Also that, but not primarily. 

> Furthermore, there's a big misunderstanding about "bias": when I judge an 
> artifact I like to do that in a certain context, and the context includes 
> (among some aspects) the identity of the creator. This does not definitely 
> lead to a bias, this lead to a better understanding of the genesis of the 
> piece I'm going to vote.
> In my opinion, if anyone thinks to be able to assign a fair "vote" without 
> contextualising with the author identity and background, well to me it's at 
> least naive.
> 
> Voting for an artifact is not like voting for the better colour for the 
> façade of a public building.
> 
> Does anyone of you like contemporary art and visit fairs, exhibitions, 
> galleries and so on?
> I can assure you can find a "pole stuck in the ground" and quoted hundreds 
> thousands dollars, because it comes from a whole artistic path of the artist. 
> And it's not just "because the market".
Certainly, it may be relevant to include the artist's background and motivation 
in the analysis of their artworks, and I fully agree that for some pieces of 
art the value lies solely with the artist and not with the work. Which may lead 
to high prices, or conversely in extreme cases to cancelling the art works or 
even destroying them. 

It is also possible to analyse a piece of art without knowing anything about 
the artist. Some arts people seem to believe that is main or even only right 
way to do it.

> In other word, if you think you can "detach" a piece of art from its creator, 
> and still be able to judge it, well... to me you have no any idea of what art 
> is.
Fair enough. Personally, I like to read books based on their contents, seeing 
films without knowing the actor or instructor names, and as for paintings, I'm 
pretty sure that most people appriciate art as is, and not due to the painter's 
name, and yes, I acknowledge that "most people" at best have a vague notion of 
what "art" is.

I also really like to see the evolution of works by a single artist, to see how 
they develop and to relate that with the artist's life. That is interesting, 
and, as you advocate, says something, perhaps deeper, but at least different 
about the works. 

The two viewpoints of art are not mutually exclusive. Sometimes you just have 
to let go and appriciate an object on its own. Going on to include the artist 
in the analysis provides more aspects in the interpretation, but you also loose 
something, get biased, and risk evaluating the work based on misunderstandings 
about the artist.

In a competition, however, if the artists are not anonymous, you accept that it 
is not the works alone that compete, but also their names, celebrity, sex, 
race, religion, lgbtq+ status etc.

I can only assume that those establishing anonymous art competitions are arts 
professionals who know what they are talking about.

As for origami, it is fine that we have both kinds of competitions. I find it 
of greater importance that they think about origami in terms of art. The works 
have brief descriptions, and some of those contribute to the analysis you ask 
for by providing some context, even if it is just a bit. 

Mostly we see people think about origami as fun, utility or ingenuity. Even in 
the present competition I feel that many of the works are there because "I 
could fold that", and not because of some deeper meaning or goal. I'm currently 
consulting for an origami exhibition at an arts museum 
(https://www.museumforpapirkunst.dk/dk/hands-on-origami), and I love that the 
works there are included because some arts professionals believe they should be 
there. 

By the way, note that at the link https://cfcorigami.com/award-entries-2023 
they are not too dogmatic. Some of the works are known from other contexts (I 
recognise some of them), and others are not really anonymous, with names 
mentioned in the description or in the accompanying diagrams.

Best regards,
 Hans

Re: [Origami] The Third Joisel Award - Voting is Open

[Lorenzo via Origami]

Hans, Miranda,

You might refer to the opportunity for the author to submit its work
anonymously, which is surely fair and which is much different than
something decided as general rule for the competition.

Furthermore, there's a big misunderstanding about "bias": when I judge an
artifact I like to do that in a certain context, and the context includes
(among some aspects) the identity of the creator. This does not definitely
lead to a bias, this lead to a better understanding of the genesis of the
piece I'm going to vote.
In my opinion, if anyone thinks to be able to assign a fair "vote" without
contextualising with the author identity and background, well to me it's at
least naive.

Voting for an artifact is not like voting for the better colour for the
façade of a public building.

Does anyone of you like contemporary art and visit fairs, exhibitions,
galleries and so on?
I can assure you can find a "pole stuck in the ground" and quoted hundreds
thousands dollars, because it comes from a whole artistic path of the
artist. And it's not just "because the market".

In other word, if you think you can "detach" a piece of art from its
creator, and still be able to judge it, well... to me you have no any idea
of what art is.

Lorenzo

On Sun, 20 Aug 2023, 23:07 Papirfoldning.dk,  wrote:

>
> On 20 Aug 2023, at 22.26, Mizu-randa  wrote:
>
>
>
> *From:* Lorenzo via Origami 
> *Sent:* 20 August, 2023 21:50
> Have you ever seen an artistic competition where you, voters, didn't know
> anything about the author?
>
>
> it’s not uncommon for a competition (especially artistic) to be under
> motto or pseudonym.
>
> Yes, that is common.
> Just search for: art competition "anonymous"
> and you will see plenty of anonymous cases and considerations regarding
> securing a more fair competition, including avoiding conflicts of interest,
> discrimination towards genders or minorities, etc. (in a huge number of
> results is due to information in cookies being "anonymous", but even
> excluding those there are plenty).
>
> These considerations are rooted in real issues, and pending your goals and
> circumstances may be well founded.
>
> Historically, specifically authors have used pseudonyms (i.e. being
> anonymous) to avoid being unfairly treated, not the least women, but also
> men for various reasons.
>
> Regards,
> Hans
>
> Hans Dybkjær
> http://papirfoldning.dk
> Society: http://foldning.dk
>
>

Re: [Origami] The Third Joisel Award - Voting is Open

[Papirfoldning.dk]

On 20 Aug 2023, at 22.26, Mizu-randa  wrote: 

From: Lorenzo via Origami 
Sent: 20 August, 2023 21:50



Have 
you ever seen an artistic competition where you, voters, didn't know anything 
about the author?

 
it’s not 
uncommon for a competition (especially artistic) to be under motto or pseudonym. 
Yes, that is common.Just search for: art competition "anonymous"and you will see plenty of anonymous cases and considerations regarding securing a more fair competition, including avoiding conflicts of interest, discrimination towards genders or minorities, etc. (in a huge number of results is due to information in cookies being "anonymous", but even excluding those there are plenty).These considerations are rooted in real issues, and pending your goals and circumstances may be well founded.Historically, specifically authors have used pseudonyms (i.e. being anonymous) to avoid being unfairly treated, not the least women, but also men for various reasons.Regards,    HansHans Dybkjærhttp://papirfoldning.dkSociety: http://foldning.dk

Re: [Origami] The Third Joisel Award - Voting is Open

[Mizu-randa]

From: Lorenzo via Origami
Sent: 20 August, 2023 21:50
Have you ever seen an artistic competition where you, voters, didn't know 
anything about the author?
I never have.

Don’t worry Lorenzo, they’re al the ‘usual suspects’ and a lot of the models 
have been published on Instagram and other socials. And btw it’s not uncommon 
for a competition (especially artistic) to be under motto or pseudonym. Well, 
in this case the organizers chose to leave out the names altogether. I don’t 
care, I don’t think any artform should be subject of a competition as art is by 
definition too divers and comparison is therefore impossible.

Origards,
Miranda


--
Dit e-mailbericht is met AVG-antivirussoftware gecontroleerd op virussen.
www.avg.com

Re: [Origami] The Third Joisel Award - Voting is Open

[Lorenzo via Origami]

Dear Gerardo,

your explanation is, of course, what I already guessed.

Nevertheless, I'm quite (let's say: very) surprised that anyone wanted to
hide the creators' name, as it seems to me like a rather crude "military
act of force", an imposition that I don't think has any equal in any of the
votes, that I can think of, in any artistic or creative world I know out
there.

Have you ever seen an artistic competition where you, voters, didn't know
anything about the author?
I never have.

And, I'm sorry to say, but if you assume that those who vote in your
competition can do it in a "mischievous" way, well then you explicitly
doubt the good faith of the same people you invite them to vote (WTF!), and
for me (no ifs, ands or buts) you are the least suited person to organize
anything aimed at the community.

I will never vote for a work whose author I don't know, especially when the
hiding of the name is due to the fact that it is believed that I may be
conditioned.
This offends and disgusts me.

In my life I have learned never to lose faith in people, and the day people
learn to have sincere and heartfelt faith in others will be a better day.
If you don't trust people, don't expect they will trust you.

Greetings.


On Sun, 20 Aug 2023 at 16:52, gera...@neorigami.com 
wrote:

> Lorenzo is asking why don't the names of the nominated creators and
> folders appear on the award entries webpage. This page
> https://cfcorigami.com/award-entries-2023
>
> I'm not a part of the awards' organizers or anything like that. I am just
> an origamist that is very interested in this project as well as other
> projects related to the origami community. Now, I can tell you that the
> awards try to exclude the names of the people nominated, during the
> voting and judging phase, in order to reduce the related bias during the
> process. Conscious or unconsciously, some participants might vote for a
> nominated work because it was made by an origamist they admire, or not vote
> for another because it was made by someone they don't like so much or
> someone they just don't know. That wouldn't be OK.
>
> Here's a quote from the awards related with that:
>
>
> "Rules and Definitions
>
> (...)All nominations must include (...)
>
> 3. Images should not convey who the creator is, as well as the descriptive
> text! The voting is anonymous!!"
>
>
> Source: https://cfcorigami.com/joisel-awards-2023
>
>
> The names of the creators and folders can become a hidrance during the
> voting and judging phase, but I do hope they become public after that phase
> is over. I hope that answers your question.
>
> --
>
> *Gerardo G.*
> gerardo(a)neorigami.com 
> instagram.com/neorigamicom
> *Knowledge and Curiosity in Origami:*
> *six private classes online* 
>
> "(...) It doesn’t happen often, but when it does, it takes your breath
> away and fills you with the true joy of *origami*. I experienced this in
> my lessons with Gerardo G. I wouldn’t trade it for anything. Gerardo is
> (...)" *C. R.* *Read the full review*
> 
>
>
>

-- 
Lorenzo Lucioni
Duesseldorf - Germany
lorenzo.luci...@gmail.com

Re: [Origami] The Third Joisel Award - Voting is Open

[gera...@neorigami.com]

Lorenzo is asking why don't the names of the nominated creators and folders 
appear on the award entries webpage. This page 
https://cfcorigami.com/award-entries-2023
I'm not a part of the awards' organizers or anything like that. I am just an 
origamist that is very interested in this project as well as other projects 
related to the origami community. Now, I can tell you that the awards try to 
exclude the names of the people nominated, during the voting and judging phase, 
in order to reduce the related bias during the process. Conscious or 
unconsciously, some participants might vote for a nominated work because it was 
made by an origamist they admire, or not vote for another because it was made 
by someone they don't like so much or someone they just don't know. That 
wouldn't be OK.

Here's a quote from the awards related with that:


"Rules and Definitions

(...)All nominations must include (...)

3. Images should not convey who the creator is, as well as the descriptive 
text! The voting is anonymous!!"

Source: https://cfcorigami.com/joisel-awards-2023

The names of the creators and folders can become a hidrance during the voting 
and judging phase, but I do hope they become public after that phase is over. I 
hope that answers your question.

--
Gerardo G.
gerardo(a)neorigami.com
 instagram.com/neorigamicomKnowledge and Curiosity in Origami:
six private classes online

"(...) It doesn’t happen often, but when it does, it takes your breath away and 
fills you with the true joy of origami. I experienced this in my lessons with 
Gerardo G. I wouldn’t trade it for anything. Gerardo is (...)" C. R. Read the 
full review

Re: [Origami] The Third Joisel Award - Voting is Open

[Lorenzo via Origami]

Is it me, or is there no name of the creator for each model in the
competition? If so, why?
It's the first time in my life that I see this kind of thing.

Lorenzo


On Sun, 6 Aug 2023 at 10:10, Ilan Garibi via Origami <
origami@lists.digitalorigami.com> wrote:

> Dear Origami Lovers,
>
> The voting for the Third Joisel Award is open!
>
> We have a record number of more than 200 nominations, showing some of the
> most intriguing and artistic models created since last August.
>
> Your choosing will determine the Popular Vote Award in all 8 categories.
> You have to be registered at the CfC site
>  in order to vote.
>
> You can vote on multiple models in each category, but you cannot give more
> than one vote per model, so there is no point to log in twice and double
> your vote.
>
> Just remember, voting for all makes no sense, so give your votes only to
> the best works!
>
> To vote, you have to click on the model's image, and then click on the
> thumb-up icon once. Now you can go back and continue your judging.
>
> Voting will be closed on the 25th of September, and winners will be
> announced in October. More details about that will come soon.
>
> Best,
>
> Ilan GARIBI and Nicola TERRY
> CfC Managers
>


-- 
Lorenzo Lucioni
Duesseldorf - Germany
lorenzo.luci...@gmail.com