DRAFT for new Membership Package/Review Comments from Members welcomed
Dear BC members I have been working with a small group of members to update and refresh the Membership Package, to include new members reference statements, and some updates on what the current events /current policy issues. We had sort of fallen a bit behind in getting this updated and it was one of the items not refreshed after our new Charter so we are prioritizing its update. We also need to have it updated so that we can conclude membership recruitment that started in Nairobi with a few new member applicants. And of course, so that our existing membership has a document of reference to use for internal purposes when needed to support your continuation as a BC member. Thanks to our members who volunteered to provide initial comments and to the ExComm members. This is a final DRAFT Version -- which means that it is now ready for full Membership comments and edits. I welcome in line edits, if you don't mind, and would really like it if you would put your initials: followed by your edit. So, for example, say you were editing the Title: The ICANN GNSO Business Constituency 2010 [MSC: Shouldnt the title be the full title of the BC, e.g. Commercial and Business Users Constituency (BC) 2010?]Or you can of course use the inline editing mechanism, but put your initialls with your edits, so I can keep track of them. We will start invoicing members during April, and the fees will remain at the 2009 level. The document attached has the fee levels incorporated. The format is very poor, and I realize that, but it will be prettied up for the website. It is really intended for new members, but of course, it is what the world reads about us and our purpose and focus, so we need your input and thoughts. I would like to have edits by Friday, April 23. It is not a policy document, but does have to reflect members input and review. We will want to post it that next week, if we are in general agreement on content. I want to explain one edit I made. During meetings in Nairobi, there were discussions with some industry groups incorporated in non Western counties,who have a not for profit status, although they represent commercial members. They were uncomfortable with whether they were eligible to join the BC. In the US and in Europe, associations have a not for profit status, but have commercial members. The footnote is intended to just be a clarification, without change, for any such questions. Best Regards Marilyn CadeBC Chair
Marilyn and those anonymous members who helped on this, it is certainly a good idea to update the BC member recruitment materials. Key updates are needed on headline policy. I note the previous version was 2 pages long and contained 948 words. The proposed new version is 7 pages long and contains 1635 words. Maybe this is why Berry proposed an executive summary. Before offering any edits, it may be useful to step back a little a think what this document is for. Past feedback from potential and leaving members has been petty consistent. "ICANN is too remote to my immediate business needs" "ICANN is too time consuming to follow". These are the barrier our words must overcome. Anyone considering joining is in the first instance directed to the Join us section of our web site. The text of the Join Us section should be available as now in a form that can be e-mailed or printed. But whatever the channel of communication, its objective is the same: a) it should be in one digestible bite a compelling reason to join b) It should make them interested to learn more by either exploring other pages of the web site or asking questions of those recruiting them. For me what it should not do is try to explain the ICANN process or even ICANN policy in any detail. That must come later after the potential member has made the connection between ICANN output and relevance to their business. So lets ask ourselves does this 7 page document meet these objectives? Philip
thanks, Philip. Your insights are always helpful. There was no intent to overload a member prospect with information, but to have current information. The present material includes references for instance, from two companies who have not been members for two years or more. :-) I did mention to all that this format needs to be improved on by a real editor. The draft is intended to also get your comments on its accuracy and currency. No worries about the number of pages that a membership package will end up as. That is what a good editor is for!!! For now, if I can get further comments on whether the information is accurate, current, that would be great. Then we can move ahead with getting something finalized for an editor to work from! Thanks to all who have provided comments. Marilyn Cade From: philip.sheppard@aim.be To: bc-gnso@icann.org Subject: [bc-gnso] DRAFT for new Membership Package/Review Comments from Members welcomed Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2010 09:56:38 +0200 Marilyn and those anonymous members who helped on this, it is certainly a good idea to update the BC member recruitment materials. Key updates are needed on headline policy. I note the previous version was 2 pages long and contained 948 words. The proposed new version is 7 pages long and contains 1635 words. Maybe this is why Berry proposed an executive summary. Before offering any edits, it may be useful to step back a little a think what this document is for. Past feedback from potential and leaving members has been petty consistent. "ICANN is too remote to my immediate business needs" "ICANN is too time consuming to follow". These are the barrier our words must overcome. Anyone considering joining is in the first instance directed to the Join us section of our web site. The text of the Join Us section should be available as now in a form that can be e-mailed or printed. But whatever the channel of communication, its objective is the same: a) it should be in one digestible bite a compelling reason to join b) It should make them interested to learn more by either exploring other pages of the web site or asking questions of those recruiting them. For me what it should not do is try to explain the ICANN process or even ICANN policy in any detail. That must come later after the potential member has made the connection between ICANN output and relevance to their business. So lets ask ourselves does this 7 page document meet these objectives? Philip
participants (2)
-
Marilyn Cade -
Philip Sheppard