[Gnso-dmpm-wg] [Dmpm] Re: Metrics Request Pilot - DMPM Rec#1

[Tony Onorato]

Berry -

My sense is to measure success based on two binary questions:  (1) did the WG use data and/or metrics as part of its process (e.g., in scoping/defining the issue, prioritizing the issues under consideration, and/or guiding the WG to an informed recommendation on the issue under consideration), and (2) [was the incorporation of data and/or metrics] [or] [were the data/metrics] useful to the WG in its process?

Best,

Tony

Tony Onorato, Esq./CIPP(US)
FisherBroyles, LLP
Directs: 202.459.3599/646.397.4750 | Fax: 516.706.9809 | tony.onorato at fisherbroyles.com<mailto:tony.onorato at fisherbroyles.com> | fisherbroyles.com<http://www.fsblegal.com/>

From: Berry Cobb [mailto:mail at berrycobb.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 3:33 PM
To: dmpm at icann.kavi.com; gnso-dmpm-wg at icann.org
Subject: [Dmpm] Metrics Request Pilot - DMPM Rec#1

All,

In making updates to the next version of our draft initial report, I reminded myself that we also need to include under the recommendation details some set of "measure of success."  I think it will benefit to provide at least a simple idea of success for the community to respond to.  Else, I suspect that if comments are not submitted to that regard, it will be asked by the GNSO Council.

Please provide input on the list, and I can add the groups ideas to the draft.  I will include a placeholder in the document.

Thank you.

B


Berry Cobb
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (ICANN)
720.839.5735
mail at berrycobb.com<mailto:mail at berrycobb.com>
@berrycobb

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-dmpm-wg/attachments/20150722/001b0c23/attachment-0003.html>