[Ssr2-review] [EXT] Re: SSR1 Assessment Methodology

[Naveed Bin Rais]

Hi,

I also put my comments early this morning in the draft.

Naveed -

On Tue, 27 Nov 2018, 10:35 Barrett, Kerry-Ann <KABarrett at oas.org wrote:

> Laurin
>
> I made changes please lt me know if you can see it.
>
>
>
> Kind Regards
> Kerry-Ann Barrett
> Cyber Security Policy Specialist
> Organization of American States
>
>
>
> *From: *Weissinger, Laurin <laurin.weissinger at yale.edu>
> *Sent: *Sunday, November 25, 2018 7:20 PM
> *To: *k claffy <kc at caida.org>
> *Cc: *SSR2 Review <ssr2-review at icann.org>
> *Subject: *[EXT] Re: [Ssr2-review] SSR1 Assessment Methodology
>
>
> Dear KC and Kerry-Ann,
> Dear all,
>
> I feel we must speak to our limitations to serve the purpose of this
> review and give context to our approach, and I don’t see what is factually
> incorrect in that paragraph.
>
> Our resources, time, and evidence are limited, and we noted the lack of
> “assessability” of some recommendations. Also, as with any assessment,
> nothing we did was exhaustive and covering everything.
> I don’t see how these limitations and us noting those lead to us having
> done a bad job, which is what I understand KC took away from reading it?
>
> Please do not understand this as me disagreeing with you completely! Some
> edits are probably needed to note the key facts and limitations (which I
> believe matter), without sounding too negative about our work.
> Rather, I am searching clarification as to what is problematic exactly and
> how it should be included in the document.
>
> All the best
> Laurin
>
> P.S. Anonymous edits/suggestions and comments are recorded but none have
> been added to that paragraph.
>
>
>
> > On 25 Nov 2018, at 18:21, k claffy <kc at caida.org> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Kerry-Ann,
> >
> > I would be happy to see that, thank you!
> >
> > I did make some edits to the document, but had forgotten
> > to log in so they are either 'anonymous' or not going
> > to show up..
> >
> > k
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Nov 25, 2018 at 10:43:19AM -0500, Kerry-Ann Barrett wrote:
> >> Thanks so much Laurin for taking the first stab at the draft but agree
> with KC to the extent that we could phrase the limitations a little
> differently.
> >>
> >> Would anyone have any objections if I suggest some edits later today?
> >>
> >> I???ve been on the road but will be in Panama later today and will have
> some time later to add some suggested edits to the google doc. Let me know.
> >>
> >> Cheers
> >> Kerry-Ann
> >>
> >>> On Nov 24, 2018, at 8:50 PM, k claffy <kc at caida.org> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> I disagree with the last paragraph,
> >>> and think it undermines the entire assessment
> >>> and the review process.
> >>>
> >>> Can you provide specific examples of recommendations
> >>> that you believe we did a crappy job of assessing?
> >>> Because that is what the current text implies.
> >>>
> >>> If someone is not satisfied with the way these
> >>> assessments have been done, leadership should ask
> >>> them to work 2-3 specific examples of what they
> >>> consider a satisfactory assessment of a recommendation.
> >>> Leadership could extend the same offer to anyone
> >>> on ICANN staff as well.
> >>>
> >>> But we cannot write a report and then end it with
> >>> "it would take too long and too many resources
> >>> to do this accurately, so we didn't."
> >>>
> >>> My specific suggestion is to remove the last
> >>> paragraph of the Limitations section.
> >>>
> >>> k
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Ssr2-review mailing list
> >>> Ssr2-review at icann.org
> >>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ssr2-review
> >>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ssr2-review mailing list
> Ssr2-review at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ssr2-review
> _______________________________________________
> Ssr2-review mailing list
> Ssr2-review at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ssr2-review
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ssr2-review/attachments/20181127/5f820526/attachment.html>