<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
Dear Colleagues,<br>
<br>
I am reading through the CROP FY19 guidelines (
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://community.icann.org/x/yicFBQ">https://community.icann.org/x/yicFBQ</a> ) and as already mentioned in
the meeting we had with CROP staff, and wearing my EURALO Chair hat,
I have real problems understanding the thinking behind some of this
year's guidelines/restrictions.<br>
<br>
- The first out of the three CROP trips needs to be used on an ICANN
meeting<br>
<br>
What is the thinking behind this? CROP is meant for Outreach.
Outreach at an ICANN meeting is already taking place through the
Fellowship, through the NextGen, through the joint NCSG-ALAC or
NCUC-At-Large sessions that we have organised. An ICANN meeting
already has the regional leadership in attendance and they are
already organising outreach there. We also make sure that we have
volunteers at the booth, and frankly our experience at the ICANN or
RALO booth at an ICANN meeting is that there are very few newcomers
that are not already participating in the various other programs.
And then CROP is only for 4 days, 3 nights, so anyone attending an
ICANN meeting through CROP will only be there for an amount of time
that is shorter than the shortest of ICANN meetings. What good is
one person going to do when we already have our regular travellers
there? So what we risk doing is to really waste that slot.<br>
<br>
- Alternatively, the first slot can be used for another type of
meeting organised by ICANN, such as GDD summits. <br>
<br>
GDD summits are reserved solely for Contracted Parties (rather
explicitly: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.icann.org/gddsummit">https://www.icann.org/gddsummit</a> ) so this does not make
sense. Other local ICANN meetings are targeted towards a specific
type of stakeholder, like businesses or government. Any CROP
traveller from At-Large would not fit in the criteria for
participants. Domains Fora that organised by ICANN are commercial in
scope, so again, this does not correspond with the scope of the
ALAC. The only meetings that would fit the At-Large purview are
meetings organised by ICANN for end users. To my understanding, in
20 years of history, ICANN has never organised such a meeting. I
would *really* like to see such a meeting being created by ICANN.<br>
<br>
- Then we can use the two remaining CROP slots on an ICANN supported
meeting<br>
What does this mean?<br>
- does this mean a meeting that ICANN is sponsoring financially?<br>
- does this mean a meeting where ICANN is already organising
sessions/workshops?<br>
- does this mean a meeting that is not sponsored by ICANN or where
ICANN is not organising sessions/workshops, but where a member of
the ICANN Board or Staff is attending?<br>
<br>
Given that an application needs to be made more than 6 weeks and 5
working days in advance of the date of the meeting, how is a RALO
meant to know if ICANN is supporting the above? Is a list of ICANN
approved meetings going to be published? Or does a RALO need to ask
the GSE Team each time whether ICANN is supporting this meeting?<br>
<br>
These are my questions/concerns regarding the new CROP process.<br>
<br>
Now onto the second part of my email and it is concerning the CROP
RT/PC.<br>
<br>
At the moment, the CROP Review Team (CROP RT) is made up of 10
people (plus 2 observers and one Chair), two from each region, who
collectively look at each CROP application and ensure that the
application follows the program guidelines, including minimum time
for an application. It also checks any discrepancy with the
application. The CROP RT members are selected by each region, with
one member coming from the Finance & Budget Sub-Committee (FBSC)
and one member coming from the Outreach & Engagement working
group. Why? It is because part of the checking of applications is to
check that they correspond with the ICANN overall Strategy Goals
(which the FBSC is involved in) and with the Outreach &
Engagement plans of the ALAC (which the Sub-Committee on Outreach
& Engagement is in charge of). I do not think that this was well
understood. There is a proposal that this committee be
disbanded/ended. <br>
<br>
The CROP Program Committee (CROP PC) is mandated by the CROP staff
as this is the Committee that interfaces the ALAC with CROP staff.
This cannot be disbanded. At present, the CROP PC is exactly the
same people as the CROP RT. But ending the CROP RT does not let you
end the CROP PC which needs to remain in operation. So my question
which I asked on yesterday's call but which I do not think I
received a response for, was that since we keep the CROP PC but not
the CROP RT we effectively are not changing the group? The only
thing we are doing is to take away the method on how we currently
select the CROP PC, and also remove the need for a CROP RT
representative to check other RALO CROP applications. Thus this
checking would need to be done by CROP program staff.<br>
So my questions here : how can a RALO change its CROP PC
representatives now? Are these people appointed by the ALAC or by
the RALOs. Do these people need to be in any other committee (like
FBSC or O&E)?<br>
<br>
I would appreciate that we work out these issues as soon as
possible, because until then, EURALO will be in the impossibility to
submit a CROP request. Our deadline for submitting a CROP request
for ICANN Barcelona (20th October 2018) is Friday 31st August.<br>
<br>
Kindest regards,<br>
<br>
Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond<br>
EURALO Chair<br>
</body>
</html>