Re: Comments on Webizen proposal

On 5/10/2014 12:54 PM, Ian Jacobs wrote:
> Hi Jeff and all,
>
> Here are some comments on the Webizen proposal [1].
>
> Ian
>
> [1] https://www.w3.org/wiki/Webizen
>
> - Name. Given the goals, it feels like the name should include W3C in it. You could spell Webizen as W3bizen with a font that makes the 3 look like a
>     backwards E. Or reuse W3 in other ways (W3Connector, e.g.).

Candidates added.

>
> - Benefits.
>   
>    1) Electoral college: +1. I have no input on voting at this time.
>    2) CEO teleconference. Suggest changing "update" to "discussion"

changed

>    3) What is a Webizen ID card? -1 until better understood

It is an ID card with your webizen # on it.

>    4) Flourish in CG list. +1
>    5) T-shirt. +1 if fulfillment is managed by a third party (and budget needs to take that into account)
>    6) Discount: +1 to discount for validator suite and also schwag at a W3C store (if we have one)
>    7) Webizen blog: +1 if moderated by Webizen representatives.
>    8) How w3c works session: I like the idea. It's not clear to me that we want to limit this to Webizens. For instance, it could be viewed as a way
>        to generate interest in the program.
>
> - Long-term benefits
>     - Create user groups. How would this be different from CGs?

This would focus on users of the technology.

>     - Best practice discussions, webinars, luncheons: I like the idea generally, but I propose a different model. If W3C is putting together a local
>      event, I think it should not be limited to Webizen participation. But there might be a fee for general public and either free or discounted entry
>      for Webizens. We want to remain open to as many people as possible (and mixing Webizens and potential Webizens sounds useful).

There has not been a lot of attention to longer-term benefits, but feel 
free to add your ideas to the wiki.

>
> - At some point the proposal will need crisp terms. For example:  Webizen includes "At Large Webizen" and "Webizen Representative".  So that
>    you can write: "Two key Member benefits are not available to At Large Webizens: participation in Working Groups (WG) and the
>    Advisory Committee (AC)."
>
>   - What does it mean in practice for a Webizen to be associated with an Office?

Not sure since I didn't write that section.  I've clarified based on my 
understanding.

>
>   - Concept & pitch (NOTE: I realize I'll be increasingly connected to this part of the proposal.). Right now there are phrases like "you want to give
>     back to the Web for all you have gained". That phrase is disconnected from the stated goals, all of which relate to W3C and its activities. I would
>     expect something like this instead: "Take your place at the W3C table." or "Help ensure Web standards meet your needs."

I leave this to Coralie who I think is in the middle of another pass on 
this section.

>    
>    
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>      http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
> Tel:                       +1 718 260 9447
>
>

Thanks for the comments.

>

Received on Sunday, 11 May 2014 01:50:26 UTC