The new organization’s volunteer group met on March 20, 2012. Good progress was made toward picking a name for the organization, and we’re moving forward with a social event inspired by Pecha Kucha.
Attending were Charles Roburn, Jim Royal, Mary Perchanok, Sebastien Cayer, and Susan Armstrong. Two members of the group — Chris L. and Kelly L’Archeveque — could not attend, but submitted comments in advance by email.
The Name Game
To recap, during the most recent round of polling, the following were the top contenders:
The new organization’s volunteer group will be meeting on March 20, 2012 at the Press Café near the ETS school on Notre Dame. The time is 6:30 pm.
Topics will include the organization’s name, planning new social events, seeking volunteers for administrative roles, and the membership structure of the new organization.
If you want to attend, and haven’t received an email on the subject in the last few days, just leave a comment below to let us know know you’re coming.
It was gently pointed out to me that the previous post on picking a name for the organization crossed a line. There’s a crucial difference between guiding a conversation and pushing an outcome, and I stepped over that line. So, I’ve widthdrawn the posting.
Instead, I would like to open up the discussion to you with an open thread on the general topic of naming. How do we proceed with this project in the weeks and months ahead?
The results of the first round of voting are in, and I have to say I’m a bit surprised by the results. The voting was far from conclusive, so we’re going to do another round.
Those names that got no votes last time have been disqualified. And as before, if you have a new suggestion to make, please do! This is a great time to exercise your creativity.
Edit: Some people have asked in the comments if we are restricted to voting for these names. Absolutely not. Check out the previous post on naming for additional suggestions. But one idea that is coming out of this process is that maybe a long name that turns into an acronym is too stuffy, too 90s. This process will continue until we have something workable.
I had hoped to have a second poll posted early this week to narrow down the name choices. But life and work have intervened.
A new poll will go up over the weekend.
One of the interesting things that came out of the previous poll was the popularity of names that don’t include the traditional phrase of “technical communication” — YULC, for example. I see the appeal of such names; they are less stuffy and much more creative. They are also a marked break with the past. At the same time, we should not stray so far as to leave the core mission behind.
If you have any more thoughts along these lines, post them, and I’ll include them in the next round of polling once I catch my breath.