I agree with Dr.Danielsen when he writes that "there will be no room for both
ESACP and a new federation in Europe". But I think that the problem is not
there because my goal is not to create competition of ESACP with
a new European federation. It is evident for many of us that the ESACP
has promoted a lot of good actions like the journal ACP, some good meetings,
and the publication of DNA consensus.... But it is also true that with only
260 members ESACP do not represent the European cytometry community
(many national societies have more than 260 members!).
So, our proposals are made to save the best realizations of ESACP
and not to help ESACP to survive. The national societies with
an official constitution represent many more than 1000 members. I will here
ask to all my colleagues acting as president of their society to present
my proposals to their boards and/or to their general assembly to confirm
what we want to do in this forum. I will also ask them to put on the Net
the number of members of their societies. If, what I hope becomes a consensus,
then the ESACP board must decide what they will and afterwards eventually we
can continue the discussion to improve our first proposals for the best of
the European cytometric community.
To the presidents of GIC, SIC, BVC-ABC, SCS, RMS, DSFCM, DGZ, HCS, PCS, and
others if any, please give us your comments and the number of members
of your society, to help us to progress in this forum.
I will thank Dr.Danielsen for the comments.
Best regards,
Jean-Luc D'Hautcourt,
President de l'Association Francaise de Cytometrie.