[NCUC E-team] Website revisions by Constituency Day?

[William Drake]

Hi

On Mar 19, 2013, at 11:34 PM, William Drake <william.drake at uzh.ch> wrote:

> I don't mean to be a broken record on seemingly small points when so many big things are being pushed forward in parallel (big thanks to Tapani, Brenden et al), but if whatever web presence we will have as of Constituency Day could have an accurate listing of members and replace the old Groups that are all dead with the Teams which are somewhat variably alive, that would be very cool.  Then we could talk a bit in the meeting about next evolutions not only of the web space, but more importantly of the member engagements it's supposed to help facilitate

I'm not sure who may be doing what with respect to the web site, nor who intends to talk about it on CD (I'd listed Wilson and Brenden on the CD agenda, but haven't heard from Wilson in many weeks).  All I do know at this point is that Brenden eliminated the old defunct Working Groups, added a page on "Working Teams" http://ncuc.org/page/working-teams, and added blog posts on the CD day and workshop.  Thanks for all, Brenden.

I'm wondering if someone with more bandwidth and tech facility than me (Tapani and Ed I understand you'll be flying together? ;-) could maybe do a few things to the website before CD next Tuesday?  Here's my short list of top priorities.

Front Page.  

*I don't recall that big grey template box saying you can add Apps etc. being there before.  Can we get rid of it?

*Along side the three menu categories (Home, Participate, Governance) we need one for Policy Positions.  What's up there now doesn't make it at all clear what we do or why we exist.  I'm hoping we can develop a little institutional memory and collective ID by pulling together as many of NCUC's policy statements (Council stuff, WG stuff, PCP stuff, etc) as people can find on their computers, and this material needs a prominent home.

Workshop Announcement.  Right now we have a pointer to the ICANN main schedule URL which takes you to the Confluence page for the event.  Should we manage to get a nicely formatted flyer with the updated final information it might be better to have that on the site.

Membership Roster. http://ncuc.org/page/membership-roster  This somehow is now under Governance rather than Participate.  Might be good to put it back?  More importantly, is there any way we could get something more recent than "Last updated 14 November 2012" up there?  It doesn't have to be perfect, if there's some names we're not sure about don't list them, but to at least have a more accurate and thus higher figure displayed would be really nice, with adjusted stats at the top?  I would like to be able to refer to these when I do my 3 minute "report in" to the GNSO Council about what we've been up to since Toronto.

Member Teams (what I'd call them, anyway) http://ncuc.org/page/working-teams.  This now under Participate rather than Governance, which would make more sense to me, but anyway: 

*The first thing that jumps out at me is that in some cases the lists of team members are shorter than the actual lists of team list subscribers.  There's no need to underplay the level of member engagement...

*Second thing: while some teams have been slow to get going, eventually each will have content, activities to report.  So why not create separate pages for each team, linked to this main page?  Each could have a one sentence descriptor for now at the top saying what the team's about, the list of participants, the link to the mailing list, and then any docs/records of activity.  So for example, the e-platform team could have a list of current initiatives, the inreach and outreach team pages could have the reports Ed just did of their first teleconferences, the Program team could have links to the two policy conferences we've done so far plus the Beijing workshop, etc.  Wouldn't this make them more real living things?

*I guess we should just eliminate the references to standing vs ad hoc, since programming will be ongoing, and I suspect bylaws-related discussions may be recurrent too.

*When I first suggested the team thing, I believe I referred to a Program Team.  I don't recall how this became the Beijing Conference Program, but we will continuously be doing programming, e.g. organizing workshops within ICANN schedules and hopefully doing an annual conference, so it'd make more sense just to use Program Team on the website and I suppose rename or create a new mailing list.

*Since there's been no mail yet but we will try to start in the next quarter, Tapani would it be possible to rename the team and list Bylaws Revision rather than Charter? I'm not sure how I screwed that up, I guess I conflated the name with NCSG, which has a charter. We have bylaws.  No idea how these differ in California public benefit corp. land but whatever.

*With the old Interest Group pages participants with personal member pages would show up in the groups. Is that no longer possible?  If it is, presumably once there are pages the facilitator of each group (or, sigh, me) could send a note to each group bugging people to add themselves in.  Would look better and give team some ontology, no?

Anyway, I don't know how much can be done by Tuesday…the member list at least one hopes. Anything else would be gravy.  And someone prepared to talk about it in the meeting.

Basta.  Jet lag and back killing me.  Any and all discussion pro/con and action welcome!

Bill
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/e-team/attachments/20130403/bdefcea5/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
E-team mailing list
E-team at lists.ncuc.org
http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/e-team