Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] Caution about results from Original Poll

[Jon Nevett <jon@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Agreed.  From my perspective, the key take-away from the poll results that 
Mikey circulated earlier is that not one proposal had more folks in support 
than not in support.  In other words, the "can't live withs" exceeded the 
supporters plus the "can live withs" with regard to every proposal.  

Unfortunately, I do not see that changing for the proposals that we currently 
have out there.  Therefore, we need to come up with some new and improved 
proposals or throw in the proverbial towel (at least for this round)  

Looking forward to seeing folks on Saturday.  Safe travels everyone.  

Best,

Jon


On Jun 16, 2010, at 2:14 PM, Jeff Eckhaus wrote:

> I did not want to  look back and dissect this poll , but have one major 
> issue. Can people please stop characterizing what others thought when they 
> voted or what their votes meant.  
>  
> To say that voting for Free Trade was a goof write in vote does not really 
> help us move forward and puts down the people who believe free trade is the 
> right path ahead.
>  
> People voted , they expressed their opinion on what they think is the best 
> plan. It gave us an idea where everyone in the group stands, let’s move 
> forward with using the poll instead of casting doubt on peoples votes.
>  
>  
> Jeff
>  
>  
>  
> From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx] On 
> Behalf Of Jothan Frakes
> Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2010 10:08 AM
> To: Neuman, Jeff
> Cc: Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] Caution about results from Original Poll
>  
> I wasn't confused at all about the poll.
> 
> These are complex issues and it was a matter of picking the proposal that had 
> the most of what one agrees with and the least of what one disagreed with.
> 
> It would be inappropriate, I think, to take the results of the poll as 
> anything indicative of group conscience without indicating it was a rough 
> poll.
> 
> Free trade seemed to me like a write in vote, almost like writing in the name 
> homer simpson when casting your vote if you don't like any of the parties or 
> candidates during election time.
> 
> The newer, atomic poll seems a wise place to gauge the group.
> 
> On a lighter note, I concur with Jeff on his assessment of the chaos that 
> ensues with ice cream and 5 year olds.  I think if we could have hamster 
> wheels at these birthday parties that could be tied to generators, many 
> energy problems could be lessened.  But let's not keep on that topic for fear 
> I be branded a proponent of child labor.  Just thinking about the 
> environmental impact.
> 
> jothan frakes
> 
> On Jun 16, 2010 7:01 AM, "Neuman, Jeff" <Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> All,
>  
> I do believe the first poll on the proposals was in fact useful and a really 
> good exercise.  And I am not just saying that because the JN2 proposal got 
> the most “yes” votes.  My caution, however, is that some are now describing 
> the “Free Trade” proposal as the one that most people support because of the 
> number of people that either said “yes” or “can live with.”  I do not believe 
> that view is entirely accurate.  This is because both the JN2 proposal and 
> the RACK+ proposal both dealt with limitations on ownership/control.  People 
> were divided on how exactly to limit ownership/control, but not on the 
> concept of whether to apply restrictions.
>  
> The analogy I use is my oldest daughter’s birthday party this year where the 
> kids had a choice of “Mixed Fruit”, “Chocolate Ice Cream” or “Vanilla Ice 
> Cream”.   7 kids (surprisingly) chose mixed fruit, 6 kids chose chocolate ice 
> cream and 6 kids chose “Vanilla Ice Cream”.  So of the 19 kids at the party, 
> more of them chose Fruit than any other choice, so that would be a true 
> statement.  However, it would also be true that more kids choice “Ice Cream” 
> in general instead of fruit.
>  
> Here we have the same type of thing.  Taken one way, more people chose the 
> Free Trade Proposal than chose RACK.  But, looked at a different way, more 
> people chose to apply limits on cross ownership/control than chose Free Trade.
>  
> We just need to remember the ice cream/mixed fruit analogy going forward.
>  
> P.S.  Never have a party with 19 screaming 5 year olds and offer them ice 
> cream….very messy and the sugar high afterwards is a killer J
>  
>  
>  
> Jeffrey J. Neuman 
> Neustar, Inc. / Vice President, Law & Policy
> 46000 Center Oak Plaza Sterling, VA 20166
> Office: +1.571.434.5772  Mobile: +1.202.549.5079  Fax: +1.703.738.7965 / 
> jeff.neuman@xxxxxxxxxxx  / www.neustar.biz     
> The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for the use 
> of the recipient(s) named above and may contain confidential and/or 
> privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient you have 
> received this e-mail message in error and any review, dissemination, 
> distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have 
> received this communication in error, please notify us immediately and delete 
> the original message.
>