Dear Consocii, according to the schedule adopted in the previous virtual meeting, you are cordially invited to the next one, Monday, 9 May 2016, at 4pm (Rome time, _summer time_!) In the site of the Academy you can now find the Statutes, and (link History) the communications circulated so far. I have attached the review of the MUSE database of the Institut des Textes et Manuscrits Modernes, written by Claude Cazale', in order to have your comments before posting it in the link of the Academic Papers. I add, as suggested by some of you, and with much hesitation, some: Suggestions concerning the essential items which should be treated in the reviews, of course when compatible with the object under examination, and not necessarily in the order adopted here. What seems important to me is that they be presented in a \fIsubjective\fP and critical exposition. Full, detailed name and IP address of the object, date of the first appearence in the web, composition of the staff, and history of the enterprise. Essential description of the object, mentioning the operating environment, the main software used or developed, the hardware and infrastructure available, the methods of research, of data analysis, and of data organization (e.g. which kind of DBMS). Are they declared in the site, how clearly, and in what detail. Whether there are bibliographic references about all this, especially concerning preceding studies or experiments. Principal disciplinary fields concerned by the object, within the humanities and within computer science, rating the compliance with the traditional methodologies in those fields, and the improvements due to the new approach. Which existing theories have inspired the procedures. How reliable seems to be the stability of the site or repository. Coi piu' cordiali saluti, Tito Orlandi