<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#330033">
Hi,<br>
<br>
thanks. <br>
numbers to stare at for a while.<br>
<br>
Interesting bottom line:<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<table style="border-collapse: collapse;" border="0"
cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" height="142" width="642">
<colgroup><col
style="mso-width-source:userset;mso-width-alt:5522;width:113pt"
width="151"></colgroup><tbody>
<tr style="height:12.75pt" height="17">
<td class="xl63" style="height:12.75pt;width:113pt"
height="17" width="151">Conclusions - The only thing these
3 groups have in common is that the proposal is too
complex, that IANA should not be shifted from ICANN at the
beginning of the transition and that accountability needs
to be in place prior to the transition.</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</blockquote>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 06-Jan-15 14:27, Bernard Turcotte
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAPhodgJPE3y2Uk+C4kswepE8Any5ziObkoZM6ggBtvVBXJGUwg@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Context-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_default">
<div class="gmail_default">All (at the request of the
co-Chairs),</div>
<div class="gmail_default"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default">Please find attached the next
version (2.0) of the analysis (based on the previous
spreadsheet which was presented on December 30th).</div>
<div class="gmail_default"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default">All the data used is included as
well as how it was classified etc. and the various tabs are
aptly named.</div>
<div class="gmail_default"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default">Tabulation of results has now been
automated to avoid errors.</div>
<div class="gmail_default"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default">There are no significant
differences vs the results presented December 30th:</div>
<div class="gmail_default"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default">
<ul>
<li>The analysis of all the responses together is
essentially the same and still does not give a majority
to Contract Co.(when using a 75% requirement)</li>
<li>The analysis by type of respondent is useful but the
cross comparisons are not, at least in my opinion.</li>
<li>The analysis of ccTLDs vs the RySG proposal in
interesting.</li>
<li>The analysis of In ICANN vs Not In ICANN is very
interesting with a high degree of correlation on many
points by those In ICANN.</li>
</ul>
<div>Attached.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>B.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
CWG-Stewardship mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:CWG-Stewardship@icann.org">CWG-Stewardship@icann.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>