[gnso-consumercci-dt] MP3 CCI meeting - Tuesday 20 November 2012 at 19:00 UTC

[Julia Charvolen <julia.charvolen@xxxxxxxxx>]

Dear All,

Please find the MP3 recording and transcript of the Consumer Metrics Project 
Discussion call held Tuesday 20 November 2012 at 1900 UTC at:

 http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-cci-20121120-en.mp3
On page :
http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/#<http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/#oct>nov

(transcripts and recordings are found on the calendar page)

Participants on the Call:
Cheryl Langdon-Orr – ALAC
Olivier Crepin-Leblond – ALAC
Steve DelBianco – CBUC
John Berard - CBUC
Tobias Mahler - Individual
Michael Graham – IPC
Jonathan Zuck - IPC
Jonathan Robinson – Registries SG
Jeff Neuman – Registries SG

Apology:
Wendy Seltzer - NCUC

ICANN Staff:
Berry Cobb
Julie Hedlund
Glen de Saint Géry
Julia Charvolen

** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list **

Let me know if you have any questions.
Thank you.

Kind regards
Julia Charvolen
For GNSO Secretariat

Adobe Chat Transcript:
Berry Cobb:Welcome to the 20 Nov 2012 CTCCC Conference call.
  jeff neuman:hello
  jeff neuman:trying to get an operator
  Jonathan Zuck:welcome
  Cheryl Langdon-Orr::-) :-) :-)
  John Berard:waiting on an operator
  John Berard:I am on
  John Berard:Neuman has his own echo chamber!
  Cheryl Langdon-Orr:on dates for input from AC/SO's as listed as I stated ALAC 
will next meet on 27th this month and ccNSO met last evening and will again on 
Dec11
  Cheryl Langdon-Orr:hand up
  Jonathan Zuck:oh John, I see your hand as well
  Steve DelBianco (BC):we have the word "Should" on just 4 of our 60 metrics.  
The first 4 under Consumer Choice, on page 14
  Michael Graham:Cheryl -- thank you for clarification of early development of 
measuring "devices"
  Cheryl Langdon-Orr:softening those 4 is fine by me... SURE. but these are 
measures per se
  jeff neuman:in this case, I am not talking about softening
  jeff neuman:i will make my point better
  Michael Graham:Agree.  Do we not make the role of proposed metrics and our 
letter clear in opening letter?
  Cheryl Langdon-Orr:thought so but let's be clearer  if needs be...
  Michael Graham:Could the screen show these provisions?
  Jonathan Robinson:I had certainly been thinking along the lines of one or 
more over-arching points in the letter.  However, I suspect Jeff may remain 
concerned that the future focus will be on the metrics in isolation from the 
letter.
  Cheryl Langdon-Orr:and measures  (these metrics) can not only rely on the 
anecdotal  (as would be sorced via surveys)  but also audit based one
  Cheryl Langdon-Orr:as these audited data sets. can then be measured over time 
(with NO indicator as to meaning of any changes observed)
  jeff neuman:As in the telecom industry and others, an "audit" can only be 
done of contractual or regulatory requirements...not of soft critera created 
outside of the contractual and regulatory environment
  Cheryl Langdon-Orr:this has to be done. to allow for targets
  Jonathan Zuck:but it's not an audit of individual registries or a mechanism 
for compliance. it's meant to measure things in the aggregate
  Cheryl Langdon-Orr:yup a snapshot of the whole lot
  Cheryl Langdon-Orr:happy also to seperate (but still look at both) 
registrants and users as proposed by Steve
  Steve DelBianco (BC):2.1 clear disclosure of TLD benefits and restrictions, 
such that potential registrants can make informed choices about registration of 
their domain names
  Cheryl Langdon-Orr:that works Steve :-)
  Michael Graham:Begin with something like: "Is there . . . " or "Whether there 
is . . . "
  Steve DelBianco (BC):2.2 clear disclosure of TLD restictions on eligibility, 
such that Internet users can make informed choices about reliance on domain 
names in that TLD
  Cheryl Langdon-Orr:agreed Michael  we make the measure and NOT take meaning 
from the absence of such disclosure as listed in new  2.2 text
  Steve DelBianco (BC):2.1 clear disclosure of TLD benefits and restrictions, 
such that potential registrants can make informed choices about registration of 
their domain names (open TLDs only)2.2 clear disclosure of TLD eligibility 
restrictions, such that Internet users can make informed choices about reliance 
on domain names in that TLD (open TLDs and closed keyword TLDs)
  Cheryl Langdon-Orr:understood. that is OK  we still need an imperical measure 
and the ability to compare and contrast any change in that measure over time
  jeff neuman:lost line...dialing back in
  Cheryl Langdon-Orr:agreed Steve we can just measure not target
  jeff neuman:back on
  Michael Graham:Agree with this -- I think the word "embody" was included to 
include "self-evident" benefits and restrictions. ?
  Steve DelBianco (BC):2.1 clear disclosure of TLD benefits and restrictions, 
such that potential registrants can make informed choices about registration of 
their domain names (open TLDs only)      (target is all TLDs)
  Steve DelBianco (BC):2.2 clear disclosure of TLD eligibility restrictions, 
such that Internet users can make informed choices about reliance on domain 
names in that TLD    (no target in Column 4)
  Michael Graham:Am I off base suggesting: "Measure whether there is clear 
disclosure . . . "?
  Steve DelBianco (BC):2.1 Measure the understanding of TLD benefits and 
restrictions, such that potential registrants can make informed choices about 
registration of their domain names (open TLDs only)      (target is all open 
TLDs)
  Steve DelBianco (BC):2.2 Measure the understanding of TLD eligibility 
restrictions, such that Internet users can make informed choices about reliance 
on domain names in that TLD    (no target in Column 4)
  Cheryl Langdon-Orr:agreed Steve
  Michael Graham:I agree
  Steve DelBianco (BC):in the Source column for 2.2:  )   Audit of TLD main 
website for “plain language disclosure”
  Michael Graham:Perhaps, though, need to indicate whose understanding is being 
measured.
  Cheryl Langdon-Orr:yep agreed put the test space up front
  Steve DelBianco (BC):2.1 Measure potential registrants’ understanding of TLD 
benefits and restrictions, such that potential registrants can make informed 
choices about registration of their domain names (open TLDs only)      (target 
is all open TLDs)
  Steve DelBianco (BC):2.2 Measure Internet users understanding of TLD 
eligibility restrictions, such that Internet users can make informed choices 
about reliance on domain names in that TLD    (no target in Column 4)   Source: 
Audit of TLD main website for “plain language disclosure”
  Steve DelBianco (BC):2.2 Measure Internet users understanding of TLD 
eligibility restrictions, such that Internet users can make informed choices 
about reliance on domain names in that TLD    (no target in Column 4)   Source: 
Audit of TLD general information pages for “plain language disclosure”
  Cheryl Langdon-Orr:general infrpmation page(s)
  Michael Graham 2:Should we clarify in the Measure what we mean by "general 
information pages(s)" since this is an Advisory letter to help the team prepare 
and define appropriate metrics?
  Steve DelBianco (BC):2.1 Measure potential registrants’ understanding of TLD 
benefits and restrictions, such that potential registrants can make informed 
choices about registration of their domain names (open TLDs only)      target: 
all open TLDs. source: biennial survey of registrants; audit of general 
information page(s) of new TLD registries
  Julia Charvolen:Olivier Crepin-Leblond joined the meeting
  Olivier Crepin-Leblond:apologies for the late arrival -- I was on another 
call & then faced connectivity issues
  Steve DelBianco (BC):2.1 Measure potential registrants’ understanding of TLD 
benefits and restrictions, such that potential registrants can make informed 
choices about registration of their domain names (open TLDs only)      target: 
all open TLDs. source: biennial survey of registrants; audit of general 
information page(s) of new TLD registries
  Steve DelBianco (BC):2.2 Measure Internet users understanding of TLD 
eligibility restrictions, such that Internet users can make informed choices 
about reliance on domain names in that TLD    target: no target Source: Audit 
of TLD general information page(s) for “plain language disclosure”
  Steve DelBianco (BC):and we no longer need 2.3 or 2.4
  John Berard:I need to drop off at this point
  Jonathan Zuck:thanks john
  John Berard:talk to Steve and Barry RE: if the advice is ready for a new 
Council motion
  John Berard:will talk, I should have said
  Steve DelBianco (BC):2.7 Quantity of Registrars offering second level domains 
in IDN scripts or languages other than English
  Jonathan Robinson (Registries SG):Apologies.  I also need to drop off to make 
another call now.
  Olivier Crepin-Leblond:I absolutely agree with Steve DB
  Cheryl Langdon-Orr::-) :-) :-)
  Steve DelBianco (BC):2.13 Measure the increased geographic diversity of new 
open gTLDs as indication of new choices created by gTLD expansion. (Do not 
count privacy/proxy registrations or registrations that fail to resolve)
  Cheryl Langdon-Orr:I'm  ok with that new 2.13 text Steve
  Michael Graham 2:Stepping out for moment.
  Steve DelBianco (BC):2.16  DNS traffic is an indicator of trust, choice, and 
competition.   DNS traffic in new gTLDs should be compared to …
  Michael Graham 2:Okay by me based on Jeff's explanation.
  Cheryl Langdon-Orr:exactly OCL using DNS traffic gives us greater granularity
  Steve DelBianco (BC):I have another call at 4 so have to drop now...
  Jonathan Zuck:Thanks Steve
  Steve DelBianco (BC):Jeff, do you have other items?
  Steve DelBianco (BC):3.4 Quantity of unique gTLD Registry Service Providers 
before and after expansion.  (counting open gTLDs only)
  Cheryl Langdon-Orr:yup ok with the parathetical as well
  Steve DelBianco (BC):alright!
  Cheryl Langdon-Orr::-) :-) :-) :-) :-)
  Olivier Crepin-Leblond:good!
  Michael Graham 2:Very good work -- as always.
  Steve DelBianco (BC):2.1 Measure potential registrants’ understanding of TLD 
benefits and restrictions, such that potential registrants can make informed 
choices about registration of their domain names (open TLDs only)      target: 
all open TLDs. source: biennial survey of registrants; audit of general 
information page(s) of new TLD registries
  Steve DelBianco (BC):2.2 Measure Internet users understanding of TLD 
eligibility restrictions, such that Internet users can make informed choices 
about reliance on domain names in that TLD    target: no target Source: Audit 
of TLD general information page(s) for “plain language disclosure”
  Cheryl Langdon-Orr:Thanks Steve this will help inform ALAC's discussions
  Cheryl Langdon-Orr::-) :-) :-) :-)
  Cheryl Langdon-Orr:bye all
  Policy Host:Thank you everyone!
  Policy Host:This meeting is adjourned.