[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [atlarge-discuss] Website Review : Comments on the Homepage

I support this assessment.

On Sun, 2002-05-05 at 20:19, Richard Henderson wrote:
> HelpFirst I'd like to give proper thanks and recognition to Joop for the excellent job
>  and hard work he has devoted to date on the icannatlarge.com website - truly 
> constructive and vital in the launch of the movement. As the organization advances 
> week by week and month by month, it's inevitable that the website should evolve 
> with it, and I hope I'm kicking off a public review of the website, its purpose, 
> its appearance, and its ease of navigation.
> I thought I'd start today with some comments on the Homepage, as I feel it now 
> needs some urgent alterations.
> 1. I don't like the fist in the logo : it implies negativity (OK I've got a lot of negative 
> opinions of ICANN but is that the image we are trying to project to attract new members?). 
> We are a positive and constructive movement, building worldwide co-operation : 
> shaking hands would be better than a fist. A totally new logo would be even better.
> 2. We should develop an independent logo which does not need the ICANN 'globe' 
> at all. We should not portray ourselves as a subgroup of ICANN but as an entity
>  in our own right. Hence...
> 3. In due course, we need a change of organization name which should feature on 
> the new homepage. The URL could still be icannatlarge.com (and a small reference 
> to that could feature in a subordinate position) : in a way this would be quite useful 
> as we still need to maintain an interface with ICANN and the URL itself would be a 
> useful link in that way. However I favour a simpler concept as our organization name - 
> something the public and press can latch onto and identify with, and something much 
> more global and less obscure than ICANN. I'd propose The Internet Parliament or The 
> Internet Democracy Group or something like this. Just suggestions as the possibilities 
> probably run into 100's. Nevertheless I have www.internetparliament.com and 
> www.theinternetparliament.com and www.theinternetparliament.org which are available 
> for use if required. Fundamentally, icannatlarge.com is not IMO a suitable name, 
> as I've explained elsewhere.
> 4. Chuck Costello's long wordy comments (however valid) should not dominate the 
> Homepage. They should be elsewhere. The Homepage must be more graphic and less 
> wordy, and should use simple language which explains our mission to new visitors and 
> ordinary members of the public.
> 5. The 'link' along the top should NOT say "ICANN members" - that's really ambiguous, 
> not factual, and suggests people are joining ICANN rather than our independent organization 
> which MAY interact with ICANN. It opens us to ridicule and charges of unreality. The 
> political reality within ICANN right now is that there is NO single At Large organization, 
> and ICANN have an initiative to divide and rule through a multiplicity of At Large groups. 
> Moreover, the idea that we are asking people to register as ICANN members suggests 
> that we a part of ICANN and that our whole organization is "within" the ICANN empire. If 
> we really want to encourage individual members to particpate as "members" inside ICANN, 
> then I suggest we contact them all and urge them to join the GA - particularly as our 
> membership would then become the largest voting block there. I'm sure Jamie Love's present 
> motion, for example, would benefit from the votes of our members! However, the Homepage 
> does NOT need "ICANN members" as the link title to the list of our membership.
> Just a few comments on the Homepage. What do people think? What would people like to see 
> on the Website? Can we encourage regional and national websites for our organization as an 
> early target, in preparation for mass outreach?
> Once again, we owe a debt to Joop for his vision and sheer hard work in launching the website
> and moving the organization forward. Nothing in the above statements is intended to detract from
> what his efforts have already achieved.
> Richard Henderson

This is a digitally signed message part