[NCUC-EC] announcing ICANN63 travel slot?

[Bruna Martins dos Santos]

Hey all,

The reason why the EC is a collegiate group is so that we make decisions
collectively and provided the input from our peers. Whenever we approach
debates assuming external factors such as "backchannel lobbying" we are not
only demeaning the group but also our peers capability of making a decision
on their own, and this should never be the case.

Since the beginning we have approached debates and tallys in a very
respectful manner and also observing our bylaws. If in some cases our EC
members did not get the chance to respond to an vote or weigh in a subject,
consensus calls for the majority's will - if we had followed that MO Dina
should have had the funding instead of the CROP given that Michael had
voted for her. What bothers me about this specific situation, other than
the personal attacks - a question suffered by some or all of us previously
and that we tried to address as a collegiate -, is that we gave a CROP
without a call or even a mention of an allocation possibility that was
initially directed to NCUC without going evaluating any CROP outreach plans
from the selected member. Had we announced that and I am pretty sure of
other members that could have possibly applied for this specific slot - as
I highlighted in previous emails.

As to the CROP slot deadline, there was never a clear understanding on
whether or not filling slot today or lets say in november would imply on
NCUC losing it. What would be lost if there wasnt any announcements today
was the opportunity of using this crop slot for the barcelona meeting, and
not the slot per se.

I really wish we had more conversations about this specific issue instead
of arriving at this situation we find ourselves at rn.

Em qua, 29 de ago de 2018 às 13:40, Elsa S <elsa.saade at gmail.com> escreveu:

> Hi Renata,
>
> I have all the right to abstain when I sense that I would be making a
> decision without a proper base. I did not abstain this time though, I
> rather waited, keepig an eye out for any deliberations that could affect
> how to weigh in NPOC Chair’s recommendation for instance. I understand
> there was a deadline, but I will never make a decision when I’m not
> entirely sure based on what I would be making it. And I have the right as
> well as the responsibility to do so.
>
> As for conflict of interest, I still haven’t taken up the role of GNSO
> Councilor, as mentioned several times, I am still acting as NCUC EC AP
> until Barcelona. This was made clear in so many different exchanges both
> formally and informally. Just FYI, I haven’t even been added to the GNSO
> Council mailing list as a councelor nor have I had handover, the only
> exchange that was made relating to this position was mitigating my presence
> in Barcelona for the start of my Councilor role. To have to justify this to
> you, is quite surprising to me.
>
> In any case, this thread is aimed to speak about a specific issue, and
> tackling the fact that on the list, it will seem like the EC actually made
> a final clear cut decision about the allocations, when we actually did not
> entirely do that. Let us refrain from opening side discussions that I would
> tackle on a different thread.
>
> Best,
>
> Elsa
> —
>
> On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 12:28 PM Renata Aquino Ribeiro <raquino at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Elsa,
>>
>> You abstained on your 2nd vote and the deadline passed.
>> In fact, you always abstain on difficult decisions.
>>
>> Right now, you are also omitting the conflict of interest of being EC
>> AP and GNSO Councillor, which I have asked you time and time again
>> privately to address on the main NCUC list.
>>
>> Please do it so
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 1:01 PM, Elsa S <elsa.saade at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Im honestly out of words as to the way this has unfolded. To start with
>> the
>> > exchange between Farzi and Renata where it was implied that we were
>> being
>> > manipulated into making a decision, to eventually making a choice for
>> the EC
>> > due to the deadline. I do understand that there was a deadline and staff
>> > would be out for a longer time than we can afford, however, I
>> personally saw
>> > a lot of potential in other candidates that I would have voted for, if
>> there
>> > wasn’t so much confusion on how to weigh in, with the different lobbying
>> > from all sides. I’m not sure as to what kind of standard we will be
>> handing
>> > over to the next EC. And it would be risky to just handover the way we
>> dealt
>> > with these allocations as is.
>> >
>> > Since the news is out, there isn’t much that can be done. But for the
>> > record, I believe there should be more trust in the EC’s capability of
>> > making a decision on their own without fear of interferance or
>> > ‘manipulation’, and there should be more of a comprehensive strategy
>> when it
>> > comes to choosing candidates. Where are the newcomers in this batch of
>> > chosen candidates for instance? What’s the outcome of having them at
>> ICANN63
>> > for us all? Is it serving the aim of policy development or not? Of
>> outreach?
>> > Of welcoming new faces? Of proper funding allocation?
>> >
>> > My two cents here.
>> >
>> > E.
>> > —
>> >
>> > On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 11:49 AM Renata Aquino Ribeiro <
>> raquino at gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Dear EC
>> >>
>> >> I am sorry but you missed the deadline for announcement for 2 days
>> >> already.
>> >> And yes, I did mention that we would very likely lose CROP ICANN63
>> >> date if we don't use, as the recent reminder of Ozan implies.
>> >>
>> >> We are already losing 9000USD on website management funding because
>> >> the EC did not come up with any contribution on this.
>> >> We discovered we had this funding in August and it is very likely the
>> >> new Chair may not be able to tap into it.
>> >> I haven't been able to address small suggestions to it.
>> >>
>> >> So we need to be more fiscally responsible to NCUC as well as
>> >> respecting our Operating Procedures.
>> >>
>> >> There is no time for  a call for ICANN63, we were questioned 2 days
>> >> ago, our staff is out until 10Sept.
>> >>
>> >> I understand the pressure on you but squandering funding is the worst
>> >> you can do.
>> >>
>> >> Best,
>> >>
>> >> Renata
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 12:35 PM, Michael Karanicolas
>> >> <mkaranicolas at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> > I also don't understand this course of action. As I understand it, we
>> >> > were
>> >> > deliberating the travel slots - and all that remained was to decide
>> >> > between
>> >> > Ben or Dina. Nobody has suggested allocating the CROP and, as Bruna
>> >> > says, we
>> >> > haven't done a proper call.
>> >> >
>> >> > I would suggest the Chair hold back on this, and we ask the EC folks
>> who
>> >> > voted for Ben OR Dina to just pick one or the other, with a deadline
>> of
>> >> > COB
>> >> > today.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 12:29 PM Renata Aquino Ribeiro
>> >> > <raquino at gmail.com>
>> >> > wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Dear Bruna
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Unfortunately I have time and time again given the EC the
>> opportunity
>> >> >> to participate on the CROP Outreach Plan, on the deadline to ICANN63
>> >> >> and on the weighing in on solutions.
>> >> >> I'm sorry you oppose now but we are out of options
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Best,
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Renata
>> >> >>
>> >> >> On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 12:23 PM, Bruna Martins dos Santos
>> >> >> <bruna.mrtns at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >> > We did not open a call for this one and it will raise questions in
>> >> >> > our
>> >> >> > membership as to why we gave it to Dina once this was never
>> announced
>> >> >> > to
>> >> >> > the
>> >> >> > larger list. And also, I dont believe that there is such thing as
>> an
>> >> >> > interpretation that if we dont use this crop NOW we are to lose,
>> >> >> > given
>> >> >> > that
>> >> >> > the three slots shall be used until the end of FY19.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Em qua, 29 de ago de 2018 às 12:18, Bruna Martins dos Santos
>> >> >> > <bruna.mrtns at gmail.com> escreveu:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Dear Renata,
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> I am sorry but I oppose this idea. We were not discussing CROP,
>> we
>> >> >> >> were
>> >> >> >> discussing travel support.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Em qua, 29 de ago de 2018 às 12:17, Renata Aquino Ribeiro
>> >> >> >> <raquino at gmail.com> escreveu:
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>> Dear all
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>> We should have announced this on the 27aug
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>> We also have the CROP ICANN63 slot to an EU NCUC member
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>> We just received a reminder today to use it, at the risk of
>> losing
>> >> >> >>> it
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>> I have read all the emails and I'll do the following
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>> Travel Support - 1st slot
>> >> >> >>> Shahul Hameed
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>> Travel Support - 2nd slot
>> >> >> >>> Benjamin Akinmoyeje
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>> CROP ICANN63
>> >> >> >>> I'll work with Dina Thomas on a NCUC CROP outreach plan and
>> send it
>> >> >> >>> to
>> >> >> >>> the EC and to the CROP staff.
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>> Best,
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>> Renata
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>> On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 10:22 AM, Bruna Martins dos Santos
>> >> >> >>> <bruna.mrtns at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >>> > Dear All,
>> >> >> >>> >
>> >> >> >>> > I believe that according the advice provided by Farzi we still
>> >> >> >>> > have
>> >> >> >>> > this
>> >> >> >>> > year to decide whether or not we are using this support
>> >> >> >>> > exclusively
>> >> >> >>> > to
>> >> >> >>> > NCUC
>> >> >> >>> > members or if we are opening the selection to NPOC and NCSG as
>> >> >> >>> > well
>> >> >> >>> > -
>> >> >> >>> > as we
>> >> >> >>> > did in this one - but as this selection is still subjected to
>> >> >> >>> > NCUC
>> >> >> >>> > EC I
>> >> >> >>> > believe that we should continue to perform by selecting the
>> >> >> >>> > funded
>> >> >> >>> > members
>> >> >> >>> > based on the quality of their outreach plans and application
>> >> >> >>> > independently
>> >> >> >>> > of the approach we seek to follow - opening calls or using
>> them
>> >> >> >>> > for
>> >> >> >>> > NCUC
>> >> >> >>> > only.
>> >> >> >>> >
>> >> >> >>> > In that sense, I am also between Dina and Ben.
>> >> >> >>> >
>> >> >> >>> > Dina provided a good application and is also supported by NPOC
>> >> >> >>> > Leadership,
>> >> >> >>> > but I agree with Louise on the "her application might have
>> >> >> >>> > benefitted
>> >> >> >>> > from a
>> >> >> >>> > more concrete outline of how she has been working within PDPs
>> -
>> >> >> >>> > or
>> >> >> >>> > tying PDP
>> >> >> >>> > experience as an observer with her policy writing". I very
>> much
>> >> >> >>> > appreciate
>> >> >> >>> > Dina's efforts regarding the Policy writing ad-hoc group she
>> >> >> >>> > tried
>> >> >> >>> > to
>> >> >> >>> > assemble, but I did not see it moving forward (and am not
>> >> >> >>> > implying
>> >> >> >>> > it
>> >> >> >>> > is her
>> >> >> >>> > fault either).
>> >> >> >>> >
>> >> >> >>> > On the other hand, we have Ben who we approved on a previous
>> call
>> >> >> >>> > and
>> >> >> >>> > due to
>> >> >> >>> > personal reasons was not able to attend the meeting. Ben is
>> has
>> >> >> >>> > been
>> >> >> >>> > involved in the RDS and the RPMs working group and while we
>> >> >> >>> > thought
>> >> >> >>> > that the
>> >> >> >>> > Policy meeting would be a moment for him to make sense of what
>> >> >> >>> > has
>> >> >> >>> > been
>> >> >> >>> > discussed in the calls, he was not able to attend. If I am not
>> >> >> >>> > mistaken,
>> >> >> >>> > when we chatted about his situation in PR, and the idea of
>> >> >> >>> > re-considering
>> >> >> >>> > him for the subsequent call was at the table.
>> >> >> >>> >
>> >> >> >>> > Given that I am very on the fence about the selection of the
>> >> >> >>> > second
>> >> >> >>> > candidate, and that the two candidates are from EU and AF, I
>> >> >> >>> > would
>> >> >> >>> > be
>> >> >> >>> > more
>> >> >> >>> > than happy to follow the advice from our EU and AF
>> >> >> >>> > representatives.
>> >> >> >>> >
>> >> >> >>> > And please, lets decide soon on this matter, the more we delay
>> >> >> >>> > the
>> >> >> >>> > decision
>> >> >> >>> > the harder it becomes to our funded members to find tickets
>> >> >> >>> > within
>> >> >> >>> > the
>> >> >> >>> > price
>> >> >> >>> > range. Barcelona is in less than two months!
>> >> >> >>> >
>> >> >> >>> > best,
>> >> >> >>> > B.
>> >> >> >>> >
>> >> >> >>> > Em ter, 28 de ago de 2018 às 10:15, Louise Marie Hurel
>> >> >> >>> > <louise.marie.hsd at gmail.com> escreveu:
>> >> >> >>> >>
>> >> >> >>> >> Dear all,
>> >> >> >>> >>
>> >> >> >>> >> First, I'd like to kindly thank Joan for her inputs.
>> >> >> >>> >>
>> >> >> >>> >> Second, I cast my first vote to Shahul. As my colleagues have
>> >> >> >>> >> already
>> >> >> >>> >> highlighted, he has been actively engaging in policy writing
>> and
>> >> >> >>> >> shows
>> >> >> >>> >> promising development within our community -- he has shown
>> >> >> >>> >> consistent
>> >> >> >>> >> commitment and dedication. His application was clear,
>> consistent
>> >> >> >>> >> and
>> >> >> >>> >> grounded. I think he would also benefit greatly from the
>> >> >> >>> >> opportunity
>> >> >> >>> >> to
>> >> >> >>> >> participate on-site and hopefully lay deeper grounds for
>> further
>> >> >> >>> >> engagement
>> >> >> >>> >> within the NCUC.
>> >> >> >>> >>
>> >> >> >>> >> Quite frankly, my second vote goes to either Benjamin or
>> Dina.
>> >> >> >>> >> Let
>> >> >> >>> >> me
>> >> >> >>> >> take
>> >> >> >>> >> a few lines to explain why - given NPOC Chair's support for
>> >> >> >>> >> Dina. I
>> >> >> >>> >> have had
>> >> >> >>> >> the opportunity to work with her in the past two meetings at
>> the
>> >> >> >>> >> onboarding
>> >> >> >>> >> program. She is committed and has engaged in drafting
>> comments -
>> >> >> >>> >> a
>> >> >> >>> >> strong
>> >> >> >>> >> applicant. Although her application might have benefitted
>> from a
>> >> >> >>> >> more
>> >> >> >>> >> concrete outline of how she has been working within PDPs - or
>> >> >> >>> >> tying
>> >> >> >>> >> PDP
>> >> >> >>> >> experience as an observer with her policy writing (a general
>> way
>> >> >> >>> >> of
>> >> >> >>> >> gaining
>> >> >> >>> >> insights and perspectives from other stakeholder groups
>> and/or
>> >> >> >>> >> maturity in
>> >> >> >>> >> navigating ICANN). On the other hand, I also think that we
>> need
>> >> >> >>> >> to
>> >> >> >>> >> give
>> >> >> >>> >> space for new applicants, and that includes giving Ben an
>> >> >> >>> >> opportunity,
>> >> >> >>> >> as he
>> >> >> >>> >> has, unfortunately, not been able to attend the last meeting
>> due
>> >> >> >>> >> to
>> >> >> >>> >> visa
>> >> >> >>> >> issues. He also submitted a good application, clearly
>> >> >> >>> >> demonstrating
>> >> >> >>> >> consistency in participating and following two PDPs and
>> looking
>> >> >> >>> >> for
>> >> >> >>> >> mentorship. My only question here is that while he states
>> that
>> >> >> >>> >> he
>> >> >> >>> >> would do
>> >> >> >>> >> his best to "keep along with the ICANN63 sessions especially
>> >> >> >>> >> those
>> >> >> >>> >> that
>> >> >> >>> >> concern the NCUC and NCSG" he didn't explain how the slot
>> would
>> >> >> >>> >> also
>> >> >> >>> >> play
>> >> >> >>> >> into his volunteer work on NPOC's PC, in particular. I think
>> >> >> >>> >> that
>> >> >> >>> >> this
>> >> >> >>> >> might
>> >> >> >>> >> have been an opportunity for him to provide a more robust
>> >> >> >>> >> account
>> >> >> >>> >> of a
>> >> >> >>> >> grounded plan for engagement in this next meeting.
>> >> >> >>> >>
>> >> >> >>> >> As observed, I outlined both the pros and cons of their
>> >> >> >>> >> applications.
>> >> >> >>> >> I
>> >> >> >>> >> don't think there's a clear shot here and thus count on my
>> peers
>> >> >> >>> >> to
>> >> >> >>> >> either
>> >> >> >>> >> provide further insights to their decision that might aid in
>> the
>> >> >> >>> >> allocation
>> >> >> >>> >> of this slot or, rely on a majority of voters for one or the
>> >> >> >>> >> other.
>> >> >> >>> >>
>> >> >> >>> >> Hope this provides a fair account of my decision.
>> >> >> >>> >>
>> >> >> >>> >> Kind regards,
>> >> >> >>> >>
>> >> >> >>> >> Louise Marie Hurel
>> >> >> >>> >>
>> >> >> >>> >> Cybersecurity Project Coordinator | Igarapé Institute
>> >> >> >>> >>
>> >> >> >>> >> London School of Economics (LSE) Media and Communications
>> (Data
>> >> >> >>> >> and
>> >> >> >>> >> Society)
>> >> >> >>> >>
>> >> >> >>> >> Skype: louise.dias
>> >> >> >>> >> +44 (0) 7468 906327
>> >> >> >>> >> l.h.dias at lse.ac.uk
>> >> >> >>> >> louise.marie.hsd at gmail.com
>> >> >> >>> >>
>> >> >> >>> >>
>> >> >> >>> >>
>> >> >> >>> >> On Mon, 27 Aug 2018 at 18:43, Renata Aquino Ribeiro
>> >> >> >>> >> <raquino at gmail.com>
>> >> >> >>> >> wrote:
>> >> >> >>> >>>
>> >> >> >>> >>> Thank you Joan for your clarification.
>> >> >> >>> >>>
>> >> >> >>> >>> On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 2:41 PM, Joan Kerr <
>> joankerr at fbsc.org>
>> >> >> >>> >>> wrote:
>> >> >> >>> >>> > Hi Renata, All
>> >> >> >>> >>> >
>> >> >> >>> >>> > NPOC is supporting Dina for a number of reasons.  She has
>> >> >> >>> >>> > been
>> >> >> >>> >>> > working
>> >> >> >>> >>> > hard
>> >> >> >>> >>> > with the newly formed PC and has a lot of experience in
>> >> >> >>> >>> > policy
>> >> >> >>> >>> > and
>> >> >> >>> >>> > processes.  NPOC feels Dina is the right choice and will
>> be
>> >> >> >>> >>> > instrumental in
>> >> >> >>> >>> > assisting with the policy going forward.
>> >> >> >>> >>> > Thanks,
>> >> >> >>> >>> >
>> >> >> >>> >>> > On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 1:23 PM Renata Aquino Ribeiro
>> >> >> >>> >>> > <raquino at gmail.com>
>> >> >> >>> >>> > wrote:
>> >> >> >>> >>> >>
>> >> >> >>> >>> >> Dear Joan
>> >> >> >>> >>> >>
>> >> >> >>> >>> >> Please see inquiry from one of the NCUC EC reps.
>> >> >> >>> >>> >>
>> >> >> >>> >>> >> On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 1:47 PM, Bruna Martins dos Santos
>> >> >> >>> >>> >> <bruna.mrtns at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >>> >>> >> > Dear all,
>> >> >> >>> >>> >> >
>> >> >> >>> >>> >> > My first vote went to Shahul, and as I am still to
>> decide
>> >> >> >>> >>> >> > who
>> >> >> >>> >>> >> > will
>> >> >> >>> >>> >> > get
>> >> >> >>> >>> >> > the
>> >> >> >>> >>> >> > second slot Im more prone to vote either o Ben or
>> Farell,
>> >> >> >>> >>> >> > who
>> >> >> >>> >>> >> > is
>> >> >> >>> >>> >> > also a
>> >> >> >>> >>> >> > NPOC
>> >> >> >>> >>> >> > member I believe.
>> >> >> >>> >>> >> >
>> >> >> >>> >>> >> > Renata, do you think that would be the case for asking
>> >> >> >>> >>> >> > Joan
>> >> >> >>> >>> >> > whether
>> >> >> >>> >>> >> > or
>> >> >> >>> >>> >> > not
>> >> >> >>> >>> >> > she'd recommend a second name since Remmy withdrew his
>> >> >> >>> >>> >> > candidacy
>> >> >> >>> >>> >> > ?
>> >> >> >>> >>> >> >
>> >> >> >>> >>> >> > best,
>> >> >> >>> >>> >> > B.
>> >> >> >>> >>> >> >
>> >> >> >>> >>> >> > Em dom, 26 de ago de 2018 às 21:59, Renata Aquino
>> Ribeiro
>> >> >> >>> >>> >> > <raquino at gmail.com> escreveu:
>> >> >> >>> >>> >> >>
>> >> >> >>> >>> >> >> Dear EC
>> >> >> >>> >>> >> >>
>> >> >> >>> >>> >> >> It is time to announce the ICANN63 travel slots.
>> >> >> >>> >>> >> >> Please decide soon.
>> >> >> >>> >>> >> >>
>> >> >> >>> >>> >> >> Thanks
>> >> >> >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> >> >>> >>> >> >> NCUC-EC mailing list
>> >> >> >>> >>> >> >> NCUC-EC at lists.ncuc.org
>> >> >> >>> >>> >> >>
>> https://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-ec
>> >> >> >>> >>> >> >
>> >> >> >>> >>> >> >
>> >> >> >>> >>> >> >
>> >> >> >>> >>> >> > --
>> >> >> >>> >>> >> > Bruna Martins dos Santos
>> >> >> >>> >>> >> >
>> >> >> >>> >>> >> > Skype ID: bruna.martinsantos
>> >> >> >>> >>> >> > @boomartins
>> >> >> >>> >>> >
>> >> >> >>> >>> >
>> >> >> >>> >>> >
>> >> >> >>> >>> > --
>> >> >> >>> >>> >
>> >> >> >>> >>> > Joan Kerr,
>> >> >> >>> >>> >
>> >> >> >>> >>> > Entrepreneur, Artist, Humanitarian
>> >> >> >>> >>> >
>> >> >> >>> >>> > T: +1 (416) 907-0783
>> >> >> >>> >>> >
>> >> >> >>> >>> > Skype: joankerr_fbsc
>> >> >> >>> >>> >
>> >> >> >>> >>> > fbsc.org, www.fbsc.eco
>> >> >> >>> >>> >
>> >> >> >>> >>> > Chair: Victory Garden Leadership Implementation Team
>> >> >> >>> >>> >
>> >> >> >>> >>> > Chair, Sustainable Agriculture, Global Humanitarian
>> >> >> >>> >>> > Technology
>> >> >> >>> >>> > Conference
>> >> >> >>> >>> >
>> >> >> >>> >>> > Chair: IEEE Smart Villages Project, Sustainable
>> Agriculture
>> >> >> >>> >>> > Working
>> >> >> >>> >>> > Group
>> >> >> >>> >>> >
>> >> >> >>> >>> > Chair: ICANN Not for Profit Operational Concerns
>> Constituency
>> >> >> >>> >>> >
>> >> >> >>> >>> > Recipient of the United Nations Civil Society Award (WSIS
>> >> >> >>> >>> > 2004)
>> >> >> >>> >>> >
>> >> >> >>> >>> > Recipient, Region of Durham Community Partnership Award
>> >> >> >>> >>> >
>> >> >> >>> >>> > Advisor, IEEE Humanitarian Initiatives Committee
>> >> >> >>> >>> >
>> >> >> >>> >>> > Advisor, Climate Smart Agriculture Youth Network, (CSAYN)
>> >> >> >>> >>> > Global
>> >> >> >>> >>> > Coordination Unit
>> >> >> >>> >>> _______________________________________________
>> >> >> >>> >>> NCUC-EC mailing list
>> >> >> >>> >>> NCUC-EC at lists.ncuc.org
>> >> >> >>> >>> https://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-ec
>> >> >> >>> >>
>> >> >> >>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> >> >>> >> NCUC-EC mailing list
>> >> >> >>> >> NCUC-EC at lists.ncuc.org
>> >> >> >>> >> https://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-ec
>> >> >> >>> >
>> >> >> >>> >
>> >> >> >>> >
>> >> >> >>> > --
>> >> >> >>> > Bruna Martins dos Santos
>> >> >> >>> >
>> >> >> >>> > Skype ID: bruna.martinsantos
>> >> >> >>> > @boomartins
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> --
>> >> >> >> Bruna Martins dos Santos
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Skype ID: bruna.martinsantos
>> >> >> >> @boomartins
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > --
>> >> >> > Bruna Martins dos Santos
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Skype ID: bruna.martinsantos
>> >> >> > @boomartins
>> >> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> >> NCUC-EC mailing list
>> >> >> NCUC-EC at lists.ncuc.org
>> >> >> https://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-ec
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> NCUC-EC mailing list
>> >> NCUC-EC at lists.ncuc.org
>> >> https://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-ec
>> >
>> > --
>> > --
>> >
>> > Elsa Saade
>> > Consultant
>> > Gulf Centre for Human Rights
>> > Twitter: @Elsa_Saade
>>
> --
> --
>
> Elsa Saade
> Consultant
> Gulf Centre for Human Rights
> Twitter: @Elsa_Saade
> _______________________________________________
> NCUC-EC mailing list
> NCUC-EC at lists.ncuc.org
> https://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-ec
>


-- 
*Bruna Martins dos Santos *

Skype ID: bruna.martinsantos
@boomartins
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-ec/attachments/20180829/bae018ba/attachment.html>