[Rt4-whois] Agenda - call on 2 May - 06:00 UTC

Thu May 3 10:40:53 UTC 2012

And to me, thank you Susan

On 2 May 2012 20:25, Susan Kawaguchi <susank at fb.com> wrote:

>   Hello All,
>
>  I have quickly reviewed the chapter edits and insertion of Steve
> Crocker's comments.   The only comments I have relate to page 26
> ·      Data accuracy – In 2009-10, ICANN commissioned a study on data
> accuracy, which was undertaken by the National Opinion Research Council of
> the University of Chicago (NORC) (the “NORC WHOIS Data Accuracy Study
> 2009/10”).  The study found that only 23% of WHOIS records were fully
> accurate [SMR1] <#1370f04c73898cbb__msocom_1> and over 20% were
> completely inaccurate.  The[Sk2] <#1370f04c73898cbb__msocom_2>  low level
> of accurate WHOIS data is unacceptable, and decreases consumer trust in the
> WHOIS, in the industry of which ICANN is a quasi-regulator, and therefore
> in ICANN itself.  The organisation’s priority in relation to WHOIS should
> be to improve WHOIS data accuracy and sustain improvement over time.  It
> should develop a methodology to measure overall accuracy, publish
> performance targets, and actively collaborate with registrars and
> registrants to improve data accuracy.
>  ------------------------------
>
>  [SMR1] <#1370f04c73898cbb__msoanchor_1>Crocker asks for a definition
> here.****
>
>  [Sk2] <#1370f04c73898cbb__msoanchor_2>In the corresponding
> recommendation we changed the terms to those defined in the NORC study.  Do
> we want to use that vocabulary here along with the definitions from the
> NORC study or leave this paragraph as it is.  ****
>
> *No Failure* Met all three criteria fully – deliverable address, name
> linked to address, and registrant confrimed ownership and correctness of
> all details during interview****
>
> Full failure – Failed on all criteria – undeliverable address and
> unlinkable, missing, or patently false name, unable to locate to interview
> ****
>
> In the corresponding recommendation we changed the terms to those defined
> in the NORC study.  Do we want to use that vocabulary here along with the
> definitions from the NORC study or leave this paragraph as it is.  ****
>
> *No Failure* Met all three criteria fully – deliverable address, name
> linked to address, and registrant confrimed ownership and correctness of
> all details during interview****
>
> *Full failure* – Failed on all criteria – undeliverable address and
> unlinkable, missing, or patently false name, unable to locate to interview
> ****
>
>
>  I have suggested a revision below in yellow.
>
>  Data accuracy – In 2009-10, ICANN commissioned a study on data accuracy,
> which was undertaken by the National Opinion Research Council of the
> University of Chicago (NORC) (the “NORC WHOIS Data Accuracy Study 2009/10”).
>   The study found that only 23% of WHOIS records met the study's criteria
> for No Failure and over 20% were categorized as Full Failure.  The[<#1370f04c73898cbb__msocom_2>low
> level of accurate WHOIS data is unacceptable, and decreases consumer trust
> in the WHOIS, in the industry of which ICANN is a quasi-regulator, and
> therefore in ICANN itself.  The organisation’s priority in relation to
> WHOIS should be to improve WHOIS data accuracy and sustain improvement over
> time.  It should develop a methodology to measure overall accuracy,
> publish performance targets, and actively collaborate with registrars and
> registrants to improve data accuracy.
>
>  I am open to changing it to something similar to what I have suggested
> or leaving it as it since the community knew, for the most part,  what we
> were talking about.
>
>
>  Susan Kawaguchi
> Domain Name Manager
> Facebook Legal Dept.
>
>   Phone - 650 485-6064
>
>   From: Seth M Reiss <seth.reiss at lex-ip.com>
> Date: Tue, 1 May 2012 19:46:12 -1000
> To: 'Alice Jansen' <alice.jansen at icann.org>, <rt4-whois at icann.org>
> Subject: Re: [Rt4-whois] Agenda - call on 2 May - 06:00 UTC
>
>   Chapter edits (minimalist approach employed).****
>
> ** **
>
> Seth****
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org [mailto:rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org<rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org>]
> *On Behalf Of *Alice Jansen
> *Sent:* Monday, April 30, 2012 11:53 PM
> *To:* rt4-whois at icann.org
> *Subject:* [Rt4-whois] Agenda - call on 2 May - 06:00 UTC
> *Importance:* High****
>
> ** **
>
> Dear Review Team Members,****
>
> ** **
>
> As you know, your next call is scheduled for Wednesday, 2 May at 06:00 UTC
> (time converter:*
> http://timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=WHOIS+RT+-+2+May+-+06%3A00+UTC&iso=20120502T06&ah=1&am=30
> *)****
>
> ** **
>
> Please find enclosed the agenda, also available at: * *
> https://community.icann.org/display/whoisreview/Call+30+-+2+May+2012 ****
>
> ** **
>
> Thanks,****
>
> ** **
>
> Kind regards****
>
> ** **
>
> Alice****
>
> ** **
>
> -----------****
>
> ** **
>
> Tomorrow's call will be our last as a review team, and our task is to sign
> off the final report. If you are unable to make the call, please indicate
> your agreement or any comments on the executive summary and compliance
> chapter if you have not already done so.*****
>
> ** **
>
> 1. Executive summary****
>
> ** **
>
> - Sign off general text****
>
> - Discuss outstanding proposals for amendments and reach conclusions****
>
> - IDN recommendations - final text for approval.****
>
> ** **
>
> 2. Compliance chapter****
>
> ** **
>
> - Sign off general text****
>
> ** **
>
> 3. Full report (other chapters)****
>
> ** **
>
> - Report from Seth on edits (minimalist approach)****
>
> - Sign off by RT****
>
> ** **
>
> 4. Steps to publication****
>
> ** **
>
> - Clean up tracked changes and combine into single document (Alice)****
>
> - Final check for sense (Alice, Emily, Kathy)****
>
> - Review Appendices and add new material as referenced (table showing
> public comments, additional Compliance documents referenced in the new
> chapter), and agree publication date for appendices (proposal - 11 May)***
> *
>
> ** **
>
> 5. AOB and vote of thanks for ICANN staff support.****
>
> ** **
>
> -------------****
>
> * To date, received from Bill, Kathy, Peter and Susan.****
>
> -- ****
>
> *Alice Jansen*****
>
> Organizational Reviews Manager****
>
> *6 Rond Point Schuman, Bt.5*****
>
> *B-1040 Brussels*****
>
> *Belgium*****
>
> Direct dial: +32 2 234 78 64****
>
> Mobile: +32 4 73 31 76 56****
>
> Skype: alice_jansen*_*icann****
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>     _______________________________________________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
>
>

-- 

*
*

76 Temple Road, Oxford OX4 2EZ UK
t: +44 (0)1865 582 811 • m: +44 (0)7540 049 322
emily at emilytaylor.eu

*www.etlaw.co.uk*

Emily Taylor Consultancy Limited is a company registered in England and
Wales No. 7630471. VAT No. 114487713.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20120503/d505f705/attachment.html 