<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#0563C1;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#954F72;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang="EN-US" link="#0563C1" vlink="#954F72">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Sorry, but I don’t see the need for this at all.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">I see it as a potential diversion from our substantive work and a time-consuming move into PR. As another matter, we’ve just detached our Secretariat from ICANN
and now we get deeply enmeshed into their communications team? <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">We might need some kind of better public outreach when we have assembled three finalized proposals and we are seeking public comment. Until then, I do not understand
the need. Martin mentioned “registries who are not involved in the ICANN process.” It is a clearly defined part of this process that it is the task of the operational communities, in this case names, to involve all relevant groups in the development of the
proposal. It is not our job to do so. So perhaps ICANN PR can offer their services to the CWG.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">I am shaking my head in disbelief about this, really. Simple explanations of the role of the ICG are not the primary problem the transition faces right now. It
is not even a secondary problem, or a tertiary one. Let’s be realistic. The problem has to do with achieving consensus among a complex set of interest groups around management of the names root. The idea that we are going to advance that process with slick
infographics about us strikes me as seriously misguided, almost narcissistic. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">--MM<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a name="_MailEndCompose"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></a></p>
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt">
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"> internal-cg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:internal-cg-bounces@icann.org]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Mohamed El Bashir<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, March 4, 2015 3:15 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> ICANN Internal<br>
<b>Subject:</b> [Internal-cg] ICG future awareness/Infographics/Media messages<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt">Dear All, <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt">The Chairs had 2 meetings with ICANN's communications team in Los Angeles and Singapore, they offered to support ICG in planning and developingneed inforgraphics, animation videos and media messages .<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt">As ICG progressing in the proposal evaluations it might be useful to explain some of our important processes to public in clear visual presentation, if we decided to accept ICANN support in this, its communications
team will develop those infographs based on ICG guidance, review and approval. the infograhs and other produced media can be published in ICG web site.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt">Please advice if we can proceed on this approach and develop some infographs with ICANN support.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt">If yes, what issues/topics you think we should focus on ( e.g proposals evaluation/assessment process, the time line, .....etc ).<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Kind Regards,<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Mohamed<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>