[Ec-ncuc] Video update

Wed Feb 6 17:31:40 CET 2013

Hi, Ed

On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 8:50 PM, Edward Morris
<edward.morris at alumni.usc.edu>wrote:

> Hi Brenden,
>
> Rule 1 is you are never again allowed to go on vacation. Rule 2 is if you
> ignore rule 1 pretty please take a satellite connected laptop. Dude, if you
> ever go on vacation for a week there may be no internet to return to.
> Thanks for coming back.
>
> I think you know my position has been...ummm...a bit distorted. When you
> first told us about the project no one was more enthusiastic than I. I
> believe in a private e-mail to you I described it as an "early Christmas
> present" for my outreach efforts. My concerns were two fold: 1) ensuring
> the end product matched what we're planning to do with the website and 2)
> trying to get more diversity into the final product. As to the former,
> maybe you could seek out Sarah and see what she's up to. I'm thinking
> things like fonts, colours and the like could be coordinated to give a
> uniform cross platform look. No cost, no big effort.
>

Good suggestion.  Another item is a logo, which the final shot will likely
include with the ncuc.org address.  Maybe the e-team/external
communications folks could give some guidance on this and colors, font
matters ASAP?

> As far as diversity, a lot tougher at this point. At the risk of inviting
> some wrath, crowd shots showing a diverse audience, anything. I'm not sure
> we want to go into Durban with a video of light skin folk telling dark folk
> we're diverse and we love you. Maybe too late but I know if you can do
> something you will.
>

We can possibly make small changes. E.g., we have about ~10 seconds which
we can possibly fill with images (if we can find/use them, please send them
my way) that highlight types of diversity. Although I note that we already
have other types of diversity, e.g., 6 women vs. 3 men speaking, 4+
nationalities, etc. But I get your point.

>
> As far as financing, I'm still not happy with the transparency and if TI
> comes in as Fadi has proposed  we'll be pretty much destroyed as we should
> be. For the moment, Tapani serves as my eTrust symbol on financial matters
> and if he's OK with it I don't object.
>
>
Great, thanks.  So, by my count, we have a majority of the EC supporting
Option 1.

> Are you planning on doing the voice over? Your voice on Google Hangout was
> really good and has a sincerity that I think comes across. Before I'm
> accused of being an academic wanting to be a filmmaker: 1) I'm not an
> academic (thank God), and 2) I have run political campaigns, including lots
> of work with spots, for a quarter century. If you have someone you want to
> use great, but if not I hope you'll consider yourself.
>
>
Very flattering, thanks.  But we actually had an interview question about
diversity, so many subjects spoke to it and Eric proposed using this for
the voice over.  IANAProfessionalFilmmaker, but it seems to work well.

> Where in New Hampshire were you? We have a cottage on Bear Island on
> Winnipesaukee and winters there are amazing. Assume you were up in Coos
> County?
>

Just south, friends have a place in Jackson.

> Beautiful country.
>
You are a lucky man.
>
>
Some days!

-- B

>  Cheers,
>
> Ed
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 4:08 PM, Brenden Kuerbis <
> bkuerbis at internetgovernance.org> wrote:
>
>> Wow, not sure where to start.  My apologies for not replying to this
>> discussion sooner, but I've been in remote New Hampshire away from the
>> Internet since Friday.  Rather than respond to all mails, I'll just briefly
>> pile on here:
>>
>> Thanks to those of you who have agreed to Option 1.
>>
>> We will look at what can reasonably be done to address some of the
>> concerns raised.  For the record, many of the issues that Bill suggested be
>> raised (IPR, securitization, GAC, etc. in addition to FoE, privacy) are all
>> already mentioned in current version. And I've already stated we were
>> working toward including a basic infographic with voice over describing
>> NCUC's diversity, assuming we wouldn't have the budget to do it
>> professionally.
>>
>> But I agree with Milton and Tapani that substantial changes at this point
>> are ill advised and would confuse the message (i.e., a short introduction
>> to NCUC with a pitch to join).
>>
>>
>> -- B
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 2:31 AM, Tapani Tarvainen <
>> ncuc at tapani.tarvainen.info> wrote:
>>
>>> On Feb 03 21:14, Milton L Mueller (mueller at syr.edu) wrote:
>>>
>>> > Bill, I don't mean to prolong this debate, but
>>> [...]
>>> > In particular, you have demonstrated why you are an academic and not
>>> > a filmmaker.
>>>
>>> While you two seem just as academic non-filmmakers to me,
>>> I must side with Milton here on the key point:
>>> Any non-trivial changes at this point would be expensive.
>>> More expensive than I'd be comfortable with.
>>>
>>> > We have a simple decision: $2000 for post production, yea or nay.
>>>
>>> Based on what I've now seen our finances, I'd be OK with that,
>>> but opposed to spending anything more.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Tapani Tarvainen
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Ec-ncuc mailing list
>>> Ec-ncuc at ipjustice.org
>>> http://mailman.ctyme.com/listinfo/ec-ncuc
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ec-ncuc mailing list
>> Ec-ncuc at ipjustice.org
>> http://mailman.ctyme.com/listinfo/ec-ncuc
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ec-ncuc/attachments/20130206/28eed26a/attachment-0001.html>