[gnso-rds-pdp-wg] The survey raw data issue

[Sam Lanfranco]

WG Colleagues,

Here are my thoughts on the survey raw data issue under discussion in 
the RDS PDP WG. We face four options. They include: (1) no survey raw 
data disclosure (but still mean/std. dev. disclosure); (2) full survey 
raw data disclosure, (3) limited survey raw data disclosure, and (4) 
abandoning use of the survey.

No disclosure (1) is the status quo. Full disclosure (2) maximizes 
transparency, at the risk of reduced survey participation and with 
little benefit over simple WG dialogue. Limited raw data disclosure (3) 
is the RDS PDP WG Thick/Thin data challenge, only now with regard to our 
survey data fields. The design of a limited disclosure protocol is 
beyond the time and resources available to us, and details beyond 
mean/std. dev. probably mean a loss of confidentiality. Small 
participant size in these surveys means that disclosure beyond mean/std. 
dev. makes it harder for responses to remain confidential. Comments are 
already less than anonymous since we know each other’s proclivities and 
propensities. One does have a choice to not comment. A permission box 
[Show my name] is also problematic, given respondent numbers, since it 
makes it easier to identify “no name” respondents.

Where do I stand on this? I am for either option (1) the status quo (no 
disclosure), or option 4 (no surveys at all). The survey is a quick aid 
to the WG dialogue and need not be seen as a binding measure of 
consensus. Survey results are not a vote. They are inputs for the WG 
dialogue grist mill, inputs that can facilitate the process of WG 
consensus. Confidentially poses no problem since the consensus process 
is still within the WG dialogue. The Chair of the WG, and the ICANN 
staff member, act as survey “scrutineers” and we should trust them to 
flag survey participation irregularities.

If (1) the status quo (no disclosure) is not acceptable, I am in favor 
of (4) no surveys. Limited disclosure (3) is logistically problematic, 
and full disclosure (2) offers few benefits over simply conducting the 
dialogue within the  RDS PDP WG. To recap, I prefer either the status 
quo or no surveys at all. I look forward to other views on this matter.

Sam Lanfranco, npoc/csih



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rds-pdp-wg/attachments/20170118/5a20edb9/attachment.html>