[NCUC-EC] Brochure Suggestions

Sat Jun 22 10:11:22 CEST 2013

On Jun 22, 2013, at 4:17 AM, Edward Morris <edward.morris at ALUMNI.USC.EDU> wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> Congratulations to Bill and Milton for putting this together in such a compressed time frame. As I understand the concept, we'll be redoing and updating things each meeting so what we go with now isn't necessarily what we'll be seeing a year from now. As one who did not have the time the past two weeks to contribute I'll stay away from design issues, which we can improve upon over time, other than to suggest we try to stick with the font used on our web site and on the movie in future updates. Cross platform uniformity is a sign of professionalism. if it is a simple menu selection we might want to consider doing it now; if more complex, no need to make the perfect the enemy of the good. Brenden is our font expert.

It looks like the font on the new site is Arial?  Milton is in love with a gal named Lucida Grande and said blah to my suggestion of Arial.  But I agree uniformity would be better.  MM can you deal?  
> 
> Other comments:
> 
> 1. The issue selection and presentation is exceptionally well done. Good job.
> 
> 2. Under 'join us', I would suggest switching 'noncommercial organisations' and 'individuals' so that  'individuals' comes first. That is, unless we are suggesting there exists something known as a "commercial individual" or "noncommercial individual."

Have you met anyone from the IPC?

Fine by me
> 
> 3. Second paragraph under "join us" should read "you and / or your organization." "Or" alone indicates choice and an individual can join as an individual member in addition to being part of an organizational member. Choice need not be made.

Can split that hair
> 
> 4. Third paragraph under "join us",  I would dump "prospective NCUC members..." and replace it with "NCUC applicants should first complete the NCSG applicant form...". "Must" is poor word choice and  not all prospective members are currently ready to apply.

should fine
> 
> 5. Dump "Use this URL to apply" and replace it with: "The NCSG application form can be found here:"
> 
> * Less command lingo, more inviting language. We're nice people, not school headmasters.*
> 
> 
> 6. I understand the intent behind directing people to our mailing list. I think a better use of this space would be to direct them to 1) our website and 2) our information e-mail address.  They can learn all about our lists via the web site.
> 
> Thus,  I would suggest replacing "You can see archives of our discussions at this URL" with:
> 
> "Further information about the NCUC can be found at our website
> 
> http://www.ncuc.org

agree
> 
> or by writing us at ncuc at ncuc.org

who receives mail to this address? Not me, just tried it.
> 
> Come join us!"
> 
> 7. I would strongly suggest dumping the last line of paragraph one of the ICANN boilerplate and re-centering the rest. The ICANN page is far too wordy and cluttered. Additionally not everyone believes the offices in Istanbul and Singapore necessarily signify internationalization as much as they do empire building, unnecessary bureaucracy and the favoring of two repressive regimes,  as opposed to 180+ other countries. It's piss poor mid 1990's management strategy combined with blatant disregard for human rights, particularly with regards to Turkey.

Internationalization point is worth making, don't care if the towns are mentioned.  But the rest needs a rewrite per previous as it's all IANA.
> 
> A general interest brochure should stay away from anything that could provoke a negative reaction. By mentioning the Istanbul office as a presumably positive part of ICANN's internationalization strategy we'll be, rightly or not, angering Cypriots, Kurds and Greeks...and as we have one young Cypriot on our waiting list I'd prefer not to make her upset. In addition, as long as ICANN feels the need to assure the Americans that the foreign offices will be headed by American citizens ( I actually had to call ICANN a few months ago when a US  government filing they had placed online concerning Istanbul actually had David Olive's un-redacted passport number. It has since been blacked out.) I question whether what these offices truly represent.
> 
> Again, no real need to deal with this stuff here. If you want to keep an internationalization line, fine, but no need to use a word - Istanbul - that has negative connotations for several nationalities.

Like United States?  The office is where it is.  

> As far as I know there is no NCUC official policy regarding the so called hubs, so let's keep that off of the brochure.

?
> 
> 8. I'm not a big fan of the Civil Society sign, largely because it ignores the individual noncommercial user part of our remit, but if we are going to use it it needs to be moved up a little bit on the page.

Needs?  Less command lingo, more inviting suggestions, please.
> 
> 9. "Who We Are" first paragraph I would change "to develop" to "and develop" or, failing that, to "in order to".

agree
> 
> 10. "Who we are" second paragraph I would add "in turn" between "which" and "elects": so then it would read "Council, which in turn elects"... Reads better.

ok
> 
> 11. "Who we are" third paragraph, replace "We have" with "The NCUC has". A lot of acronyms preceding...let's make it easy for new folks to follow the plot.

Then we can work on the old ones.
> 
> 12. "Who we are" third paragraph insert "in" between "and" and "many" to read "rights and in many…"

ok
> 
> 13. Under what we do let's get proactive and emphasize the We. Start every point with "We"..."We send members", "We appoint" "We facilitate" etc. If we "we" up the content lose the "What we do" and replace it with "What the NCUC Does".

Either works but we preferred starting with action verbs under a global we
> 
> I hope my suggestions are taken constructively as intended. It reflects my training in precise language (law) and branding (politics). If accepted I believe the brochure will be a friendlier, more welcoming place for newcomers to learn about us. Hopefully it builds upon the hard work Milton and Bill have done to create the prototype.

thanks
> 
> Kind Regards,
> 
> Ed
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 12:54 PM, William Drake <william.drake at uzh.ch> wrote:
> 
> Begin forwarded message:
> 
>> From: William Drake <william.drake at uzh.ch>
>> Subject: [Membership-affairs] Rough Draft of Brochure
>> Date: June 21, 2013 12:53:17 PM GMT+01:00
>> To: "membership-affairs at lists.ncuc.org" <membership-affairs at lists.ncuc.org>
>> 
>> Hi
>> 
>> Settings for the list have been adjusted so I am now resending the below. Actually, Milton made a couple tweaks I've not had time to look at so all the points below may no longer be relevant, will see this afternoon when able. Anyway, the current version of the brochure is attached.  We need the thing to be delivered in a little over two weeks so I will have to send to ICANN publications dept. this weekend from here in Lisbon, where I'm supposedly attending the EuroDIG meeting but am actually hiding in my room doing NCUC, MAG etc. most of the time, except for sessions I'm supposed to speak in etc.  Any quick feedback greatly appreciated.  Sorry for the rushed process, not what I'd hoped for but what I can do under the circumstances.
>> 
>> Bill
>> 
>> 
>> Begin forwarded message:
>> 
>>> From: William Drake <william.drake at uzh.ch>
>>> Subject: First Rough Draft of Brochure
>>> Date: June 19, 2013 8:08:11 AM GMT+01:00
>>> To: "membership-affairs at lists.ncuc.org" <membership-affairs at lists.ncuc.org>
>>> 
>>> [trying again]
>>> 
>>> Hi
>>> 
>>> Milton and I spent a couple hours fooling around the other day and got as far as the attached.  We are fairly content with the basic layout and look, but of course will listen if ICANN's graphic designer has some good suggestions on how to spiff it up.  
>>> 
>>> To be honest, I'm rushing to grade papers today and then leaving for the European IGF tomorrow, where I'll be heavily booked up until Friday, at which point I can circle back and spend a little more time on this.  I'm supposed to get this to ICANN by the end of the week, which may slip for a few days but shouldn't by much.  What we really need at this point is feedback on text.  I'm sure some of the phraseology could be more consistent and punchy, that we've overlooked important points that could fit in, etc.  Comments:
>>> 
>>> P.1 top page is fine I think although hopefully we won't have any rights issues with the CS sign
>>> 
>>> P. 2 Who We Are is ok but I wonder if we're clear enough about GNSO
>>> 
>>> P. 3 What We Do has some redundancies and may be missing relevant points
>>> 
>>> P. 4 Our Issues some of the explanations are not as elegant as one might like
>>> 
>>> P. 5 About ICANN we lifted this from their website but actually it's all about the IANA function, not a good representation of ICANN's work…no mention of gTLD policy process in GNSO=>Board/GAC etc.
>>> 
>>> P.6 Join Us!  Seems thin.
>>> 
>>> So….if anyone has any ideas that could help in the next iteration, please share them.
>>> 
>>> Thanks
>>> 
>>> Bill
>> 
> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Membership-affairs mailing list
>> Membership-affairs at lists.ncuc.org
>> http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/membership-affairs
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Ncuc-ec mailing list
> Ncuc-ec at lists.ncuc.org
> http://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/20130622/27a102b2/attachment.html>