Re: [gnso-consumercci-dt] Fwd: Proposal for more metrics to keep track of

[Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <ocl@xxxxxxx>]

Dear Michael,

thank you for your kind message. My apologies for the time it has taken
me to reply. My answers in-line:

On 09/12/2011 22:50, Michael Salazar wrote :
> SOCIETAL  - might users initially be confused no matter what measures are
> put in place to prevent confusion?  My  concern is that we will most
> certainly get some sort of negative result initially but those negative
> results will tend to decline over time as users become accustomed to a
> different structure (or as search engines find ways to effectively handle
> the introduction of a number of new gTLDs).  I am not sure if this
> necessarily measures the success (or not) of the program.

The confusion might be related to the magnitude of the change, i.e the
number of new gTLDs appearing simultaneously. you are correct that
initially the figure will be negative but the rate at which recovery
takes place will be the important metric to track, especially if the
question of speeding up or slowing down the rate of new gTLD creation
ever comes up.

>
>
> SPAM - Would this be by all new gTLDs versus existing TLDs?  I know we
> have stayed away from creating categories of gTLDs because our view is
> that the user community/market will naturally create those categories.
> Perhaps this can be measured by categories of gTLDs (as defined by the
> community/market) as opposed to all new gTLDs.  My concern is combining
> gTLDs that have taken appropriate measures with those that have not and
> using this as an overall measure of the program.

I'd suggest this metric to be categorized by gTLD. Some might quickly
attain a tendency for spam while others might indeed be run in such a
way that spammers will find them hard to use. In any case, tracking such
metric is important if ICANN is interested in having convincing
arguments when confronting any non complying registry. Today, we're told
that there are "good registrars" and "bad registrars" and that the good
ones vastly outnumber the few bad ones, and I completely agree with
this. Tomorrow, with so many registries, we might be faced with the same
problem.

Kind regards,

Olivier

-- 
Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD
http://www.gih.com/ocl.html