[Gnso-ssc] [Potential Spoof] Re: [Potential Spoof] Re: For your review - RDS RT evaluation survey options

Tue Apr 4 13:07:49 UTC 2017

Hello Frederic,

The three calls are scheduled to allow for enough time for deliberation before Monday’s deadline. However, if the group is able to agree on the nominations during the first or second call, the other meeting(s) may get cancelled. For now the most important thing was to get this time into your calendars.

Best regards,

Marika

From: <gnso-ssc-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of Frédéric Guillemaut - SafeBrands <fg at safebrands.com>
Organization: SafeBrands
Date: Tuesday, April 4, 2017 at 00:50
To: "gnso-ssc at icann.org" <gnso-ssc at icann.org>
Subject: Re: [Gnso-ssc] [Potential Spoof] Re: [Potential Spoof] Re: For your review - RDS RT evaluation survey options

Hello All,

I agree with this move, but do we really have three conf calls ? Or are they three occasions to meet for those who were not available ?

Best

Frederic

Le 04/04/2017 à 00:26, Susan Kawaguchi a écrit :
Hello All,

Looks like we have 3 phone calls scheduled but haven’t made a firm decision on the Surveymonkey template.

Unless I missed an email today Julf, Frederick, Renata and I support Option 1.

Since we are limited on time I would suggest that we move ahead now with Option 1 and have staff send out the SurveyMonkey to the SSC.

Let me know, if any one opposes this step forward.

Susan

From: <gnso-ssc-bounces at icann.org><mailto:gnso-ssc-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of Susan Kawaguchi <susank at fb.com><mailto:susank at fb.com>
Date: Monday, April 3, 2017 at 10:28 AM
To: Marika Konings <marika.konings at icann.org><mailto:marika.konings at icann.org>
Cc: "gnso-ssc at icann.org"<mailto:gnso-ssc at icann.org> <gnso-ssc at icann.org><mailto:gnso-ssc at icann.org>
Subject: [Potential Spoof] Re: [Gnso-ssc] [Potential Spoof] Re: For your review - RDS RT evaluation survey options

Correction -

I would prefer option 2 of the survey monkey template but I am fine with option 1 also.
On Apr 3, 2017, at 10:23 AM, Susan Kawaguchi <susank at fb.com<mailto:susank at fb.com>> wrote:
Hello All

I would prefer option 2 of the survey monkey template but I am fine with option 2 also.

I agree that the survey results should be transparent and shared if requested.

Hopefully, the others will chime in soon and we can all start working on reviewing the candidates, filling out the survey in prep for the Wednesday call

Susan

Sent from my iPhone

On Apr 3, 2017, at 6:17 AM, Marika Konings <marika.konings at icann.org<mailto:marika.konings at icann.org>> wrote:
All, so far the feedback is as follows:

Preference for option 1: Julf, Frederick, Renata
Preference for option 2: Poncelet

Can you please weigh in as soon as possible so we are able to launch the survey with sufficient time before the next meeting? We will also need your feedback concerning how the results are shared. Renate has already indicated that she prefers the survey results, including individual responses to be shared publicly.

Best regards,

Marika

From: <gnso-ssc-bounces at icann.org<mailto:gnso-ssc-bounces at icann.org>> on behalf of Marika Konings <marika.konings at icann.org<mailto:marika.konings at icann.org>>
Date: Thursday, March 30, 2017 at 20:20
To: "gnso-ssc at icann.org<mailto:gnso-ssc at icann.org>" <gnso-ssc at icann.org<mailto:gnso-ssc at icann.org>>
Subject: [Gnso-ssc] For your review - RDS RT evaluation survey options

Dear All,

Following on from the call today, staff has gone ahead and created two (for now) possible approaches for a survey to review the candidates for the RDS Review Team:

·         Option 1 – See https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/Preview/?sm=0hjSAi4ZCoUvdD2Kv0gANdf5YVqJkYkY72BakcBodNIid_2FUGWhFFHZYmxyB7zn0K[surveymonkey.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.surveymonkey.com_r_Preview_-3Fsm-3D0hjSAi4ZCoUvdD2Kv0gANdf5YVqJkYkY72BakcBodNIid-5F2FUGWhFFHZYmxyB7zn0K&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=7_PQAir-9nJQ2uB2cWiTDDDo5Hfy5HL9rSTe65iXLVM&m=2zNUmJODrxcFaE9ZlN-Gx2Ku8s1bE0nCPqcUT4GYQ74&s=Q8Nn4WU6CuYLmVysl8yVLg-C6A5t4pLc9_hCNvZvwAc&e=> for a preview. This is a very straightforward approach which first asks two questions in relation to whether the candidate qualifies as a GNSO candidate (yes/no-don’t know) and whether the candidate has the necessary expertise and competence (yes/no-don’t know), followed by a ranking of the candidates. This approach is similar to the one used by the volunteers that reviewed the SSR2-RT candidates.

·         Option 2 – See https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/Preview/?sm=3yLMDGyDuJTXv7WxGEXYmZTUiaAeDz3ZMxJ6g2UuNK6V0_2FXUhfilY6EjEGBvPgJQ[surveymonkey.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.surveymonkey.com_r_Preview_-3Fsm-3D3yLMDGyDuJTXv7WxGEXYmZTUiaAeDz3ZMxJ6g2UuNK6V0-5F2FXUhfilY6EjEGBvPgJQ&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=7_PQAir-9nJQ2uB2cWiTDDDo5Hfy5HL9rSTe65iXLVM&m=2zNUmJODrxcFaE9ZlN-Gx2Ku8s1bE0nCPqcUT4GYQ74&s=wPB5kUKuUiCZj5IX0W24JOGRccTZsjw8FU76kLhm6TQ&e=> for a preview. This survey goes into a bit more detail as it asks to rank the candidates based on how the meet 1) the skills and expertise as outlined in the call for volunteers, and 2) the desired attributes as outlined in the call for volunteers. This option could be further refined by asking a ranking for each individual skill / expertise and/or desired attribute, but that would make the survey significantly longer and would also take you more time to complete. The aggregated score could be used to obtain an overall ranking based on the responses from all.

Note that these two options are in preview mode – any responses will not be recorded.

Please share with the list which approach has your preference and/or which modifications or alternative approaches should be added to this list of options.

Once the SSC has agreed on an approach, you will also need to decide whether you intend to share the individual survey responses with the SSC or only the aggregated results as well as whether you intend to share these publicly. As noted on the call today, the charter foresees that “To facilitate its deliberations, the SSC may decide to conduct some or all of its deliberations in private, but if so, it is expected to provide a rationale with its recommendations”.

We would like to ask you to share your feedback as soon as possible so that ideally the survey will be launched early next week to allow for review and discussion of the results during next week’s meeting (please remember to fill out the doodle poll that has been circulated by Nathalie).

Best regards,

Marika

P.S. You will also find attached the updated summary document which now includes a column for gender.
_______________________________________________
Gnso-ssc mailing list
Gnso-ssc at icann.org<mailto:Gnso-ssc at icann.org>
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_listinfo_gnso-2Dssc&d=DwICAg&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=gvEx8xF7ynrYQ7wShqEr-w&m=FU2GfV7QNpZjoawq9PNbsA_5tJPqwFGrUig0P66Cu3s&s=CKj-VLCtQRo3Jb4lz5Se_Rm6SwM1_gUvIqKoltHAHq8&e=
_______________________________________________
Gnso-ssc mailing list
Gnso-ssc at icann.org<mailto:Gnso-ssc at icann.org>
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_listinfo_gnso-2Dssc&d=DwICAg&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=gvEx8xF7ynrYQ7wShqEr-w&m=yAfHVz9RUufVQod_bgM44dVCJ_7DcNtE7d0BAZ0_qc8&s=AWUQYyhuXQJ12ExXkYQ16OtBgMhu5GRnu39tiSd4A84&e=

Sent from my iPhone

_______________________________________________

Gnso-ssc mailing list

Gnso-ssc at icann.org<mailto:Gnso-ssc at icann.org>

https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ssc

--
[hoto]

[https://s3.amazonaws.com/images.wisestamp.com/symbols/frames/frame_bubble_left_top_part.png]

[https://s3.amazonaws.com/images.wisestamp.com/icons_32/linkedin.png][linkedin.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.linkedin.com_in_fredericguillemaut_&d=DwMDaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=7_PQAir-9nJQ2uB2cWiTDDDo5Hfy5HL9rSTe65iXLVM&m=x5YQUi0LO6ct5qFQSoD1fO0AqEOo6W_BLi8HiB5jxVs&s=9qqZboBeScrLNbBjNtE68XtFlWU0pDOOzbv-wuH-pIQ&e=> [https://s3.amazonaws.com/images.wisestamp.com/icons_32/twitter.png] [twitter.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__twitter.com_safebrands&d=DwMDaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=7_PQAir-9nJQ2uB2cWiTDDDo5Hfy5HL9rSTe65iXLVM&m=x5YQUi0LO6ct5qFQSoD1fO0AqEOo6W_BLi8HiB5jxVs&s=a5pHhZU8XJ86KeRxGbr38nEBcwRXO-nOC5qai8f_jWw&e=>
Frédéric Guillemaut
Directeur Associé, SafeBrands

[https://s3.amazonaws.com/images.wisestamp.com/symbols/grey/small/phone2.png]Direct : +33 (0)4 88 66 22 07 <tel:Direct%20:%20+33%20%280%294%2088%2066%2022%2007>
[https://s3.amazonaws.com/images.wisestamp.com/symbols/grey/small/phone2.png]France : +33 (0)4 88 66 22 22 <tel:France%20:%20+33%20%280%294%2088%2066%2022%2022>
[https://s3.amazonaws.com/images.wisestamp.com/symbols/grey/small/mobile.png]Mobile : +33 (0)6 81 29 81 27 <tel:Mobile%20:%20+33%20%280%296%2081%2029%2081%2027>
[https://s3.amazonaws.com/images.wisestamp.com/symbols/grey/small/email1.png]fg at safebrands.com <mailto:fg at safebrands.com>
[https://s3.amazonaws.com/images.wisestamp.com/symbols/grey/small/social.png]Skype: mailclub1
[https://s3.amazonaws.com/images.wisestamp.com/symbols/grey/small/website.png]www.safebrands.com [safebrands.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.safebrands.com&d=DwMDaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=7_PQAir-9nJQ2uB2cWiTDDDo5Hfy5HL9rSTe65iXLVM&m=x5YQUi0LO6ct5qFQSoD1fO0AqEOo6W_BLi8HiB5jxVs&s=HdAVn4XJPxEs5eQ7H1eZwOxcJ6q13impl_Dol5Swjhs&e=>
[https://s3.amazonaws.com/images.wisestamp.com/symbols/grey/small/address1.png]Pôle Média de la Belle de Mai • 37 rue Guibal • 13003 Marseille • France

[https://s3.amazonaws.com/images.wisestamp.com/apps/linkedin_connect.png][linkedin.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.linkedin.com_in_fredericguillemaut_&d=DwMDaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=7_PQAir-9nJQ2uB2cWiTDDDo5Hfy5HL9rSTe65iXLVM&m=x5YQUi0LO6ct5qFQSoD1fO0AqEOo6W_BLi8HiB5jxVs&s=IEmjTo2wE3_qYYL6lC8ETXPFbq0qopyTKQTGCNMMcCg&e=>

N.B : En application des principes de respect de l'équilibre vie privée vie professionnelle à SafeBrands, les mails qu'il m'arrive d'envoyer en dehors des heures ou jours ouvrables n'appellent pas de réponse immédiate.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-ssc/attachments/20170404/90fb3f35/attachment-0001.html>