[Rt4-whois] Initial RFP Draft for Consumer Trust research

Wed Jun 22 03:59:03 UTC 2011

Dear Kim and All,

I was recently in a discussion at a forum within ICANN, where we were
discussing a study which did not get the necessary results and thus failed
to help the work being undertaken.  A self-criticism which came out of this
discussion was that the group within ICANN provisioning the study did not
get involved in enough detail while planning the study.  Thus, I would
suggest to be more specific, where we are clear in what we require (this
will also help in getting clearer proposals and save re-negotiation time for
ambiguous proposals).

regards,
Sarmad

On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 7:58 PM, Kim G. von Arx <kim at vonarx.ca> wrote:

> Actually, having thought about it, I think we may be better served if we
> just simply leave the numbers out and see what the applicants suggest.
>
> Kim
>
>
>
>
> On 21 Jun 2011, at 22:54, Kim G. von Arx wrote:
>
> I agree with those changes.  Thanks Sarmad.  I am, however, still concerned
> about the limit of 10 and 3 respectively as I am concerned that 3 will not
> fairly canvass the developing countries in the three relevant regions, i.e.,
> Africa, Asia-Pacific, and South-America.  Therefore, I think it should, at
> the very least, be increased to 15 and 5 or even in the 20s.
>
> Anyway, just my thoughts.
>
> Kim
>
>
> On 21 Jun 2011, at 22:47, Dr.Sarmad Hussain wrote:
>
> Dear all,
>
> Thanks Lynn and Kim.
>
> Here is another version of 3.2 incorporating some more of the points.  I am
> highlighting changes above those already incorporated by Kim.
>
> 3.2. The second deliverable is to perform surveys on a global scope in
> multiple languages and scripts, compile and analyze the results and report
> findings.  A minimum of ten (10) key countries is required and must be
> reasonably distributed across countries in the Asia Pacific region, the
> Americas, Europe, Middle East and Africa and shall include, at least, 3 developing
> countries. The surveys must collect a minimum of 100 responses per
> country.  Surveys should be conducted in the language that is local for
> each country.  A fair and balanced approach must be employed to canvass all
> age and gender groups equally.
>
>
> regards,
> Sarmad
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 7:18 PM, Lynn Goodendorf <
> lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com> wrote:
>
>> Thanks Dr. Sarmad and Kim.  The info I gathered on cost elements and
>> variables indicate that the number of languages carries more incremental
>> cost than the number of countries.  However, in order to get a valid sample
>> per country, some would be more difficult than others.
>> Lynn
>>
>> *Sent from my MOTOROLA BRAVO™ on AT&T*
>>
>>
>> -----Original message-----
>>
>> *From: *"Kim G. von Arx" <kim at vonarx.ca>*
>> To: *lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com, lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com*
>> Cc: *rt4-whois at icann.org*
>> Sent: *Wed, Jun 22, 2011 01:35:24 GMT+00:00*
>> Subject: *Re: [Rt4-whois] Initial RFP Draft for Consumer Trust research
>>
>> Hi Lynn:
>>
>> Great work. I made some track changes in the document. I am not sure if we
>> want to include more detailed Terms and Conditions of the RFP, but I think
>> that is up to ICANN. I added just two terms and conditions obligations: (1)
>> IP assignment - assuming that we want to retain the IP rights; and (2)
>> provided a more specific time for response. Normally RFPs should have
>> several more, but since this is an ICANN RFP template, I think it is better
>> for ICANN to determine what other T&Cs are required, if any.
>>
>> I have also added some language that ensures age and gender equity
>> including the inclusion of developing countries. In light of that, I wonder
>> whether 10 countries are sufficient and we may want to increase it to 15 and
>> have at least 5 developing countries included, but I am not sure how much
>> that will affect the budget.
>>
>> Kim
>>
>>
>> On 21 Jun 2011, at 18:42, ** ** wrote:
>>
>> > Dear All,
>> > Attached is an initial draft of an RFP for the Consumer Trust research
>> work.
>> > I have used a previous ICANN RFP authored by Liz Gasster as an example.
>> >
>> > As you will see, the timeline to get this done by our meeting in
>> September is going to
>> > be a crunch. So asking that everyone review this at their earliest
>> convenience so
>> > we can finalize it and issue.
>> >
>> > I also have developed a list of prospective companies for distribution
>> of the RFP.
>> > Will be sending that later this morning.
>> > Lynn
>> > **_______________________________________________
>> > Rt4-whois mailing list
>> > Rt4-whois at icann.org
>> > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Rt4-whois mailing list
>> Rt4-whois at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois
>>
>>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Rt4-whois mailing list
> Rt4-whois at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110621/28f0becc/attachment.html 