[NCUC-EC] reminder: CROP proposals in evaluation

Wed Feb 28 20:10:32 CET 2018

Dear all,

My apologies for the delay.
After taking a close look at the proposals, I'd vote yes for all of them.
While I agree that strategies for LAC and AF have to be further detailed,
proponents show high commitment and willingness to take NCUC regional
engagement also as a way for them to get more involved in the community -
we want this energy! I would also point out that, especially for LAC and
AF, it is great to see more community members taking the stand to apply for
CROP. As said in previous emails there is still a challenge for people to
be aware of programs such as CROP.

All the best,

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 <l.h.dias at lse.ac.uk> *
louise.marie.hsd at gmail.com

2018-02-26 15:36 GMT-05:00 Michael Karanicolas <mkaranicolas at gmail.com>:

> Hi.
>
> Yes - I did. Kathy and myself were the only two applicants. It's a pretty
> niche meeting, and I don't think there was a lot of interest in attending.
>
> Mike
>
> On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 4:33 PM, hfaiedh ines <hfaiedh.ines2 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi all
>>
>> I ll review CROPS shortly and come back to you shortly.
>>
>> @Michael, can you please confirm if you received/or not the NCSG Travel
>> slot to attend the INTA meeting in Seattle? (dating back to Feb 10th)
>> https://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-ec/2018-February/000293.html
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>>
>> 2018-02-26 16:51 GMT+01:00 Bruna Martins dos Santos <
>> bruna.mrtns at gmail.com>:
>>
>>> Thanks for the update, Michael! Yep, I guess its both fortunate and
>>> unfortunate the merger, but I am sure good things can come out of this !
>>>
>>> 2018-02-26 11:35 GMT-03:00 Michael Karanicolas <mkaranicolas at gmail.com>:
>>>
>>>> Great. By the way, Bruna, your comment on NCUC participation is well
>>>> taken, but I've also just today heard back from RightsCon saying they
>>>> want to merge this session in together with one that's been proposed
>>>> by Xianhong Hu from UNESCO.
>>>>
>>>> On the one hand, this may provide a good boost to attendance, and
>>>> allow an interesting collaboration opportunity. On the other hand, it
>>>> obviously reduces our "control" over the session and its participants.
>>>> Still, I'll try to push for more NCUC involvement.  Will go out to the
>>>> lists with more information shortly.
>>>>
>>>> Mike
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 9:53 AM, Renata Aquino Ribeiro
>>>> <raquino at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> > Dear Bruna, Michael
>>>> >
>>>> > Thank you for your comments.
>>>> > As soon as all EC finalize their comments on proposals we can get back
>>>> > to presenters with the requests and results of evaluation.
>>>> >
>>>> > Best,
>>>> >
>>>> > Renata
>>>> >
>>>> > On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 10:46 AM, Bruna Martins dos Santos
>>>> > <bruna.mrtns at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> >> Btw, I approve all three CROP requests but I would like for the LAC
>>>> and
>>>> >> Africa ones to have more consistent outreach plans.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> 2018-02-26 10:45 GMT-03:00 Bruna Martins dos Santos <
>>>> bruna.mrtns at gmail.com>:
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Renata, one short clarification: Having read all the proposals now I
>>>> >>> wanted to make clear that I did not object to any of them.
>>>> >>> I just think we could suggest adaptations to both of them - thats
>>>> why I
>>>> >>> had questions with regards to time in the LAC one and outreach in
>>>> both. If
>>>> >>> we asked Ayden to better describe outreach plans in his CROP
>>>> proposal why
>>>> >>> shouldnt we ask Roxanne and Liz ?  I find it necessary to clear up
>>>> my
>>>> >>> considerations because (a) I dont think I am going beyond my EC
>>>> role when I
>>>> >>> write them and (b) these members will most likely get their CROP
>>>> requests
>>>> >>> approved and will get to represent NCUC in a forum so we should
>>>> raise the
>>>> >>> bar and make some requirements when it comes to the Constituency
>>>> >>> representation.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> One question though: were the Africa and LAC proposals approved to
>>>> the
>>>> >>> respective programmes ? You wrote on your email that the LACNIC one
>>>> was in
>>>> >>> provisional acceptance, what about the Africa one?
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> I would also like all of those who took the time to send the email
>>>> to the
>>>> >>> list supporting both proposals taking the time to suggest outreach
>>>> ideas.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Best,
>>>> >>> B.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> 2018-02-26 10:18 GMT-03:00 Michael Karanicolas <
>>>> mkaranicolas at gmail.com>:
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>> Hi,
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>> I vote to approve the CROP LAC LACNIC29 + LACNOG and the CROP AF -
>>>> Africa
>>>> >>>> Internet Summit. Both look good, and I'm pleased that there's been
>>>> such
>>>> >>>> strong collaboration among the community in developing these
>>>> proposals.
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>> Best,
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>> Michael
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>> On Sun, Feb 25, 2018 at 2:18 PM, Renata Aquino Ribeiro
>>>> >>>> <raquino at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>> Hi
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>> Answers inline.
>>>> >>>>> Short answer: all proposals were sent both to general list and EC
>>>> list.
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>> On Sun, Feb 25, 2018 at 2:54 PM, Bruna Martins dos Santos
>>>> >>>>> <bruna.mrtns at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>> My comments are under each CROP
>>>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>> CROP AF - Africa Internet Summit
>>>> >>>>>> https://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-ec/2018-February/00880
>>>> 7.html
>>>> >>>>>> Sent date 7Feb
>>>> >>>>>> NCUC Session proposal: to be sent until 2March, sent to
>>>> NCUC-Discuss
>>>> >>>>>> and NCUC-EC
>>>> >>>>>> CROP Proposer: Liz Orembo
>>>> >>>>>> CROP Status: In evaluation by EC
>>>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>> Vote: The applicant doesnt quite describe her outreach plans in
>>>> her
>>>> >>>>>> application: " This time I plan to work with the regional
>>>> engagement teams
>>>> >>>>>> on ICANN sessions, main focus this time will be on NCUC and its
>>>> role at
>>>> >>>>>> ICANN. I'm also planning on sending a presentation proposal.
>>>> Until 2 March
>>>> >>>>>> this can be done. I'll try to build this presentation with NCUC
>>>> members" -
>>>> >>>>>> this feels a little empty. Also her presentation proposal is not
>>>> listed on
>>>> >>>>>> the email, was it approved ?
>>>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>> [RAR] I believe when proposer sent this application the details
>>>> for AIS
>>>> >>>>> proposal weren't posted yet. Now they have and she did, sent to
>>>> regional
>>>> >>>>> list, main list and EC and received no objections. However, lots
>>>> of
>>>> >>>>> collaboration in the document
>>>> >>>>> Proposal document
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-c6tsMtWCxBDHtbFL9OsGy6U
>>>> uz1rzpx2qpgARR4SQbg/edit
>>>> >>>>> Discussion on regional list Feb 14
>>>> >>>>> https://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-af/2018-February/00025
>>>> 6.html
>>>> >>>>> Proposal on main list Feb 19
>>>> >>>>> https://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/2018-February/
>>>> 043731.html
>>>> >>>>> Proposal on EC list Feb 20
>>>> >>>>> https://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-ec/2018-February/00889
>>>> 7.html
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>>> CROP LAC - LACNIC29 + LACNOG
>>>> >>>>>> https://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-ec/2018-February/00880
>>>> 6.html
>>>> >>>>>> Sent date 7Feb
>>>> >>>>>> NCUC Session proposals: 2
>>>> >>>>>> NCUC Session proposal status: provisional acceptance
>>>> >>>>>> CROP Proposer: Roxanne John
>>>> >>>>>> CROP Status: In evaluation by EC
>>>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>> Vote: Yes with conditions! Presentation proposal looks
>>>> consistent and
>>>> >>>>>> is very good, apart from that 5 min for 3 speakers looks too
>>>> little time. On
>>>> >>>>>> a side note, I would like the applicant to be more active on the
>>>> general
>>>> >>>>>> presentation and less of a presenter or moderator (the proposal
>>>> doesnt quite
>>>> >>>>>> state who will be doing what). I also see no outreach plan such
>>>> as (a) draft
>>>> >>>>>> members, (b) participate on discussions on behalf of ncuc or any
>>>> other
>>>> >>>>>> possibility, the idea of developing outreach with GSE and not the
>>>> >>>>>> constituency also seems a little off - Given that the member is
>>>> from the LAC
>>>> >>>>>> region, I would love if she could send her proposal to the list
>>>> asking for
>>>> >>>>>> input.
>>>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>> [RAR] Proposals were also sent to list and received comments. I am
>>>> >>>>> co-author of proposals.
>>>> >>>>> Note that these proposals are only flash talk readouts of reports
>>>> of
>>>> >>>>> work NCUC did at IGF2017 and will do at WSIS.
>>>> >>>>> Proposer will indicate, through her readout, what were the issues
>>>> >>>>> discussed by NCUC at these venues and who did that discussion.
>>>> >>>>> Also there is an idea of remote presentation by key policy people
>>>> in
>>>> >>>>> NCUC via a short video.
>>>> >>>>> If the proposal is approved the arrangements for this will be
>>>> made.
>>>> >>>>> Proposal document (IGF2017 is the concrete one right now as we are
>>>> >>>>> waiting for WSIS results)
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1iHn-npOfO4Q6WmBP3a5QU3A-
>>>> rDoGiSaAlh2d5Vcgufo/edit
>>>> >>>>> Proposal sent to list
>>>> >>>>> https://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/2018-February/
>>>> 043619.html
>>>> >>>>> Proposal sent to EC list
>>>> >>>>> https://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-ec/2018-February/00880
>>>> 6.html
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>> CROP NA - Rightscon
>>>> >>>>>> https://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-ec/2017-December/00864
>>>> 3.html
>>>> >>>>>> Sent date 17 Dec
>>>> >>>>>> NCUC Session proposal: 1
>>>> >>>>>> NCUC Session proposal status: Accepted
>>>> >>>>>> CROP Proposer: Michael Karanicolas
>>>> >>>>>> CROP Status: In evaluation by EC
>>>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>> Vote: Yes! This is the most developed CROP proposal of them all
>>>> but one
>>>> >>>>>> point for consideration would be to include other NCUC member in
>>>> attendance
>>>> >>>>>> both in the Panel composition and in the management of the booth
>>>> - but for
>>>> >>>>>> this we probably to have wait for the RightsCon funding requests
>>>> to come
>>>> >>>>>> back.
>>>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>> best,
>>>> >>>>>> b
>>>> >>>>>> --
>>>> >>>>>> Bruna Martins dos Santos
>>>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>> +55 61 99252-6512
>>>> >>>>>> 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
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> --
>>>> >>> Bruna Martins dos Santos
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> +55 61 99252-6512
>>>> >>> Skype ID: bruna.martinsantos
>>>> >>> @boomartins
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> --
>>>> >> Bruna Martins dos Santos
>>>> >>
>>>> >> +55 61 99252-6512
>>>> >> 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
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> *Bruna Martins dos Santos *
>>>
>>> +55 61 99252-6512 <+55%2061%2099252-6512>
>>> 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
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-ec/attachments/20180228/60f7ea38/attachment.html>