[Gnso-rpm-data] Proposed agenda and updated tables for the RPM Data Sub Team call this Friday

[Kurt Pritz]

Hi Everyone:

Attached is my attempt at formulating the GNSO questions to registrants in a way to engender the responses and data we are seeking. (See question 6.) Is this what we had in mind?

I need some advice: The GNSO approved formulation calls for testing trademark claims in “different languages.” How many different languages do we think we will need to satisfy whoever it is that included that phrase in the questions?

Thoughts for constructing the survey, where we would want 1000+ respondents to be statistically meaningful:

1) I am against using existing stakeholder groups to take this survey out to their “members” as that will result in non-random samples and results that are otherwise skewed. 

2) The most inexpensive way to conduct the survey is for registrars to reach out to their registrants. Registrars could offer discounts on domain renewals for taking the survey (and state the importance of participating). ICANN can fund the discounts and administrative costs. (I don’t know if registrars would do this but I am suggesting this.)

3) An outside survey firm could do this fairly cheaply. It might become expensive because so few people are registrants - they might have to contact 30 panelists or more to find one registrant.

Mary - I am sorry I did not put this directly into our wiki document. Would you mind doing that?

Comments welcome on the substance and the methodology & thanks,

Kurt

 



> On Oct 19, 2017, at 11:23 AM, Mary Wong <mary.wong at icann.org> wrote:
> 
> Dear RPM Data Sub Team members,
>  
> Please find attached the updated tables from the Working Group’s data request that was approved by the GNSO Council. As requested, we have done the following:
> Broken up the original table into two tables – Table 1 for all the survey work; Table 2 for the other work to be undertaken by staff and others (e.g. researchers, contractors);
> Added a third column to Table 1 to include the specific Charter question(s) to which that specific data request is directed;
> Added a fourth column to Table 1 for Sub Team draft questions, notes and other guidance to be provided to the professional survey designer; and
> Provided staff updates to all the research tasks listed in Table 2.
>  
> While the resulting document is fairly long, you will see that this is because of pasting the relevant Charter questions, some of which are quite lengthy. We have not changed any of the content from the tables that were part of the Council-approved request.
>  
> For an agenda for this Friday’s call at 1600 UTC, staff would like to propose the following:
>  
> Roll call
> Select/elect Sub Team chair(s)
> Review staff update on Table 2, for timing and to provide any needed specific guidance to staff
> Discuss updated Table 1, including assigning volunteers to each set of questions for the target groups
> Planning for ICANN60 – agenda for Sub Team session
>  
> Thanks and cheers
> Mary
> <Data Request Table - Sub Team Use - 18 Oct 2017.docx>_______________________________________________
> Gnso-rpm-data mailing list
> Gnso-rpm-data at icann.org <mailto:Gnso-rpm-data at icann.org>
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-data <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-data>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-data/attachments/20171023/234110a9/attachment-0002.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Data Request Table - Sub Team Use - 18 Oct 2017(q6).docx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Size: 122700 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-data/attachments/20171023/234110a9/DataRequestTable-SubTeamUse-18Oct2017q6-0001.docx>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-data/attachments/20171023/234110a9/attachment-0003.html>