[Ec-ncuc] Mission statement and identity > getting teams on the website

[William Drake]

Hi again Norbert

On Jan 11, 2013, at 11:41 AM, Norbert Klein <nhklein at gmx.net> wrote:

> On 9 1.2013 23:52, William Drake wrote:
>> Hi Norbert
>> 
>> On Jan 9, 2013, at 4:18 PM, Norbert Klein <nhklein at gmx.net> wrote:
>> 
>>> On 9 1.2013 21:30, Tapani Tarvainen wrote:
>>> 
>>> [snip]
>>>> Sounds good to me. I take it he's new NCSG member and we still
>>>> need to get him to join NCUC, by whatever process we can manage?
>>>> 
>>> I think it will be most important to clearly, but briefly, have a description about what is what - NCSG, NCUC - and how they relate - and this in the wider environment of the GNSO of ICANN.
>>> 
>>> I think whenever I talked with people about the possibility of them joining NCUC, I often got questions about what-is-what. A reference to the ICANN site or some sub-sites will probably NOT provide clarity, but frighten people because of the complexity of ICANN.
>>> 
>>> Therefore WE should try to elaborate something easy to read, and clear - less than one page - saying WHY we are in NCUC and what we strive for.
>> This material from the front of ncuc.org seems a bit dated but ought to be clear enough, one would think:
>> 
>> Who can join NCUC?
>> The NCUC is open to noncommercial organizations and individuals involved in education, community networking, public policy advocacy, development, promotion of the arts, children's welfare, religion, consumer protection, scientific research, human rights and many other areas. See our charter for membership eligibility (including proposed revisions allowing individual members).
>> 
>> How do I/we join NCUC?
>> The NCUC is a Constituency within the Noncommercial Stakeholder Group (NCSG) at ICANN. To become an individual or organizational member of the NCUC, you must complete the NCSG application and select NCUC as the Constituency you wish to join. Once your application is approved, you can join this website. Get involved in protecting the communication and activities we value on the Internet!
>> 
>> If you don't think it's clear enough, would you be willing to take a lead on drafting something new that we could use?   Later when we have a functioning communication comm we can elaborate it further to taste?
>> 
>> Bill
> Thanks Bill,
> 
> for helping me to articulate more clearly my concern. I agree, the wording you quote here is clear - but I think in our regular communications on the lists we do not use much this URL - http://ncuc.org/ - as the starting point, or as the point of reference to the good materials stored there. 
> 
> And also there are certain features I do not understand (maybe I am not the only one): What is the function of Colleagues on this site? I have 5 colleagues (a rather randomly assorted group - with some I communicate (via the lists) often, with the majority close to never; and I have a Colleague request from a person in a context probably VERY different from mine - should I respond? Why should I respond? How does such a "colleague" relationship relate to the other lines of communication? 

I don't really understand the problem here.  It's a social networking site.  People ask to become your friends or colleagues, you say yes or no, and then you're connected, for whatever purposes you do or don't make of it.  Similar to joining a Group.
> 
> So: it is not the wording - but the location of this wording in our regular exchanges. And I think it might be good to clarify some things (keep them with a defined meaning - or throw them out) like the "Colleagues".

I'm not entirely sure I'm getting what you're suggesting but perhaps once we teams set up and working together through whatever vehicles we decide (e.g. Group spaces on the Ning or something else) you could walk the E-platform Team through your concerns with an eye to making improvements.
> 
> Surely this cannot be done just be discussing it here - but where is such house-cleaning to be done? Maybe by a Group on http://ncuc.org/ ? Maybe by the 12 Members of the Media Group there (where the latest activity is noted in December 2009):
> 
> Members responsible for media relations and media strategy.
> Members: 12
> Latest Activity: Dec 14, 2009 
> 
> And somebody (maybe this group? - or rather not) will also have to review the 14 existing groups (and their membership) to have a clearer idea about the locations where we cooperate.

These groups are all defunct and as I've suggested before I believe we should replace them with the new functional teams.  If in addition other groups are formed down the line to work on specific substantive issues etc., then of course we can add them there too.

Wilson?would you be able to take care of this with your E-platform team (please see my message to the NCSG list on org matters)?  I would think we'd want to do the following:

1.  Create spaces for the new teams and list the people associated with them?  (I suppose people with profiles can be shown that way)

2.  It might make sense from an institutional memory standpoint to create a space on the site called Previous Groups and dump all the old ones there, rather than simply deleting them.  Is that doable?

3.  Probably we want to eliminate the option on the front page that invites anyone off the street to "Add a Group."  That's the kind of thing that leads to a proliferation of empty spaces.  Let' start with the EC-agreed functional teams, and any subsequent group formation should be approved by the EC as well.

Again, nothing we do now to get started locks us into a final decision about the website.  If all the web wizards decide a Ning is not the best for us and want to migrate to some other platform, we can deal with that then.  But for now let's get some web presence going so people know we're alive and they can join and participate.

> 
> All this is to say that I appreciate your effort that we have to clarify and organize or reorganize many things in NCUC. - I would like to better understand the framework for these efforts. And I am prepared to play my role - especially if it is in a defined context so that all the different efforts will be clearly interrelated and coordinated.
> 
We're trying?

Cheers

Bill

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ec-ncuc/attachments/20130113/4973b7c3/attachment.html>