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

Wed Jun 22 05:57:01 UTC 2011

Thanks Kim.  Range would be good idea, to give, instead of leaving it
completely open.

regards,
Sarmad

On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 9:11 PM, Kim G. von Arx <kim at vonarx.ca> wrote:

> Hi Sarmad:
>
> I think that is a good point, however, I would suggest that we keep the
> number of countries blank, but add some language that requires the applicant
> to support their reasoning and how it will fully encompass a truly global
> perspective including developing countries, genders, ages, etc.
> Alternatively, I would suggest we provide a range.
>
> Kim
>
>
> On 21 Jun 2011, at 23:59, Dr.Sarmad Hussain wrote:
>
> 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/20110621/0385f3e7/attachment.html 