[gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Update to RDS PDP polling process

[Stephanie Perrin]

Great news!  Thanks

Stephanie Perrin

On 2017-02-01 00:30, Lisa Phifer wrote:
>
> Dear all,
>
> Based on the additional input received on the mailing list, the 
> leadership team further considered WG member arguments for and against 
> changing our polling process to publish WG member name in future poll 
> results.
>
> While these concerns were originally raised in the context of a 
> request for raw data, the dialog has evolved into a debate about 
> whether WG member name should be published to promote transparency and 
> accountability in WG proceedings. Some WG members have indicated they 
> prefer to participate in polls anonymously, but the majority of WG 
> members appear to prefer poll responses be explicitly associated with 
> WG member names. Absent a compelling argument for anonymity, the 
> leadership team has concluded that the following process change should 
> be applied to future polls.
>
> From here onwards, our polls will no longer collect IP addresses from 
> respondents. However, WG member names will be both collected and 
> included in published poll results. The timestamps that are generated 
> when responses are submitted will also appear in published poll 
> results. It will be clearly stated in all future polls that, by 
> submitting a response, you are granting permission for your entire 
> response – including WG member name and response timestamp – to be 
> included in poll results.
>
> As previously indicated, poll results will henceforth be made 
> available to the WG in two forms: A Survey Monkey-generated summary 
> and an exported XLS file. However, with the above changes, it will no 
> longer be necessary to delete columns from the XLS file (or process 
> that export in any other way) prior to posting.
>
> While some WG members may not be fully comfortable with inclusion of 
> WG names and timestamps in future poll results, the leadership team 
> believes this decision reflects the majority desire for complete 
> transparency in all WG deliberations– including these informal polls – 
> and aligns with the GNSO Working Group Guidelines principles of 
> transparency and accountability. As stated previously, member 
> responses to these informal polls are assumed to be provided in their 
> individual capacity and not as representative of any groups to which 
> they belong.
>
> As always, any WG member who disagrees with the leadership team’s 
> decision is welcome to post a counter-argument to this list, but we 
> hope that this approach represents a fair balance between the 
> different viewpoints expressed and allows us to return our focus to 
> the substance of our deliberations.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Lisa
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
> gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rds-pdp-wg/attachments/20170201/c9fa5004/attachment.html>