Ideas[edit | edit source]

* We might see who can get the most cards signed? -- in which case we might need to take this page down and do it offline...

~~What does this mean? Caterina~~

~~In Singapore, we might make a little contest to see who can get the most cards signed? Ray~~

Save for later conferences

* Also, let's go with with great caricatures and likelihood of attending Singapore, vs. well known. i.e. you don't have to be famous to make it into the deck

I think it's good to get well-known people on the cards. We can fill up the rest with great caricatures and likelihood of attending. I think it's important to keep at least the ICANN and sponsor people. Caterina
~~Maybe sponsors on Joker cards? Or maybe not, since the Joker Cards are such good places for people too :-)~~

~~I think sponsors sounds good, since jokers are the most dispensable card. Caterina~~

* Okay, so I like the examples without the border (1-3), is the difference between those three just the background color of the photo? I like the back example as well, I like the logo for Singapore- I think it's a good specificity and while it would date any leftover cards it seems like a good plan just to not have any leftovers.

Border on face cards because that's how they are traditionally

** As far as choosing people, I have yet to add any specific input but I have a few points nonetheless! First, I think the more recognizable the better. I would say that all caricatures prior to Ryan's work have a tendency to not really look like the actual individual. That doesn't mean we should exclude Rhoda's work but I think we should have an eye for using good, recognizable caricatures. (Putting a person's name at the bottom of the card would be ideal, in my opinion, but that could be an extra printing hurdle).

- I was expecting sponsors to be put on an extra card in the deck; not because this was ever discussed or even listed as a possible option yet, but because most decks of cards have those extra ad-type cards...This is another one of my solutions that would require more printing, thus money and coordination with the printers..but with the amount we're ordering maybe we could swing that. ANYWAYS, I think the joker could work for the reasons ya'll have stated, but they also are prime real-estate. With that said, I don't think I know anyone well enough to nominate them as an ICANN joker. Andrew

One sponsor joker, one person joker.

* Also, I've noticed the beginnings of thematic grouping of the individuals by suit. That's a good idea in my opinion, it provides a cohesiveness to the suit and I think it even helps carry forward the way ICANN is very much set around networks and groups rather than individuals. If we made those categories firm it would help us fill in the blanks more quickly. (it could be hard to fill out and entire suit, but I still think it's worth it). Right now it seems we have: Spades - ICANN Supporting Orgs, Clubs- ICANN Board members and ICANN staff, Hearts - People from the RALOS, Diamonds - Sponsors. I like that too (I've been saying I like a lot of things, it's true). We could combine the RALOS/Supporting Orgs if we wanted to do a whole suit of non-affiliated attendees, the non-famous attendees if you will. Room to play here but I like the thematic grouping idea.Andrew