Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] Poll Chart

[Richard Tindal <richardtindal@xxxxxx>]

There's far more votes for 'Opposed'  than anything else ---  so lets put that 
column first as it's the most indicative of opinion

Lets start with 'most opposed' and work down to 'least opposed'.

R


On Jul 21, 2010, at 1:27 PM, Jeff Eckhaus wrote:

> Mikey,
>  
> I know that the issue of sorting and ranking in the presentation has been 
> contentious, but we need to forget about what we all want and how we jockey 
> our positions to the top since this report is for us to issue and for others 
> to read and comment. The GNSO, the Board and the Community.  We need to think 
> about how they will read this and understand it.
>  
> Almost every poll / results that I see has the first column ranked from 
> highest to lowest with the other columns following. (X axis). The favorable, 
> could live with  (Y axis) is fine the way it has been presented as it goes 
> from favorable to mediocre to negative to did not participate. This is the 
> standard format in almost every poll with agree on the far left and disagree 
> on the far right with no opinion last.
>  
> I know some people are going to go against my suggestion and say we need to 
> randomize or draw straws or rock paper scissors, but I believe that in the 
> interest in putting out a coherent report we need to stick to standards that 
> most consumers of this report will understand
>  
> Thanks
>  
> Jeff Eckhaus
>  
>  
> PS –I may be rusty but would take Berry on in an excel contest. Could do 
> pivot tables and vlookups in my sleep J
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
> From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx] On 
> Behalf Of Mike O'Connor
> Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2010 1:14 PM
> To: Berry Cobb
> Cc: Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] Poll Chart
>  
> wow.  Berry is the first person i know who actually knows how to use 
> PivotTables in Excel!  that catapults him into Excel Ghod status for me.
>  
> dear all.  you're right -- JN2's row got goofed up last night when i typed it 
> in.  i checked against Berry's results, and the results on the front tab of 
> the spreadsheet i sent (which is also correct), and for the life of me i 
> don't know where those numbers came from.  just a late-night error.  anyway, 
> here's what the table looks like in the next version of the draft.
>  
> Proposal Name
> In Favor
> Could Live With
> Opposed
> No Opinion
> Did not vote
> JN2
> 12
> 11
> 16
> 2
> 26
> RACK+
> 12
> 3
> 23
> 2
> 27
> Free Trade
> 16
> 4
> 20
> 1
> 26
> CAM3
> 2
> 12
> 24
> 2
> 27
> IPC
> 1
> 5
> 29
> 5
> 27
> DAGv4
> 0
> 11
> 27
> 2
> 27
>  
>  
> hm...  on to the ranking sequence...  i can't remember where that sequence 
> came from...
>  
> so here it is in alphabetical order (i thought about that rAscal Tim's idea 
> of using the second letter of the proposals for the alpha sequence, until i 
> realized that 3 proposals have "A"s in that second slot)
>  
> Proposal Name
> In Favor
> Could Live With
> Opposed
> No Opinion
> Did not vote
> CAM3
> 2
> 12
> 24
> 2
> 27
> DAGv4
> 0
> 11
> 27
> 2
> 27
> Free Trade
> 16
> 4
> 20
> 1
> 26
> IPC
> 1
> 5
> 29
> 5
> 27
> JN2
> 12
> 11
> 16
> 2
> 26
> RACK+
> 12
> 3
> 23
> 2
> 27
>         
> On Jul 21, 2010, at 11:59 AM, Berry Cobb wrote:
> 
> 
> Team,
>  
> I used Pivot Tables to validate the summary numbers.  Please see the 
> pivot_proposal tab.
>  
> For some reason, JN2+ numbers were off on “Can Live With”, “Oppose”, and “No 
> Opinion”.  All the other numbers seem to be right.
>  
>  
> Berry Cobb
> Infinity Portals LLC
> berrycobb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://infinityportals.com
> 866.921.8891
>  
> From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx] On 
> Behalf Of Ron Andruff
> Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2010 8:48 AM
> To: 'Neuman, Jeff'; Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [gnso-vi-feb10] Poll Chart
>  
> Just checked and apologize, Jeff.  You’re right.  JN2 had 11 Can Live Withs.  
> Poll results attached.
>  
> RA
>  
> Ronald N. Andruff
> President
>  
> RNA Partners, Inc.
> 220 Fifth Avenue
> New York, New York 10001
> + 1 212 481 2820 ext. 11
>  
> From: Neuman, Jeff [mailto:Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx] 
> Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2010 11:40 AM
> To: Ron Andruff; Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [gnso-vi-feb10] Poll Chart
>  
> The JN2 data is NOT correct.  I cant speak for the others.  Can someone send 
> the raw data.  Don’t understand how JN2 supporters (and those that can live 
> with it) had no duplicates, was the first in terms of overall support, and 
> now goes to last.
> 
> Something is not right.
> 
> Please provide the raw data!
>  
> Jeffrey J. Neuman 
> Neustar, Inc. / Vice President, Law & Policy
> 
> 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.
>  
>  
> From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx] On 
> Behalf Of Ron Andruff
> Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2010 11:25 AM
> To: Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: FW: [gnso-vi-feb10] Poll Chart
>  
> Milton’s post was using old data with duplicates and the like, Jeff.  The new 
> numbers are correct by my read.
>  
> RA
>  
> Ronald N. Andruff
> RNA Partners, Inc.
>  
> From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx] On 
> Behalf Of Neuman, Jeff
> Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2010 9:33 AM
> To: Mike O'Connor
> Cc: Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [gnso-vi-feb10] New version of the report-draft candidate -- now 
> Version 5
>  
> Here is what is in line 814 (Of the redline).
>  
> Proposal Name
> In Favor
> Could Live With
> Opposed
> No Opinion
> Did not vote
> JN2
> 12
> 4
> 20
> 1
> 26
> RACK+
> 12
> 3
> 23
> 2
> 27
> Free Trade
> 16
> 4
> 20
> 1
> 26
> CAM3
> 2
> 12
> 24
> 2
> 27
> IPC
> 1
> 5
> 29
> 5
> 27
> DAGv4
> 0
> 11
> 27
> 2
> 27
>  
> I think the could live with and “Did not vote” columns are messed up.  I cant 
> remember the raw results, but here is what Milton posted on his blog.
>  
> Ranked by # supporters 
> 1 Free Trade 16 39%
> 2 JN2 12 29%
> 3 RACK+ 11 27%
> 4 CAM3 2 5%
> 5 DAGv4 0 0%
> 
> Ranked by acceptability
> 1. JN2 25 61%
> 2. Free Trade 20 49%
> 3. RACK+ 15 41%
> 4. CAM3 14 37%
> 5. DAGv4 11 29%
> 
> Ranked by strength of opposition 
> 1. DAGv4 27
> 2. CAM3 24
> 3. RACK+ 23
> 4. Free Trade 20
> 5. JN2 15
>  
>  
>  
> Jeffrey J. Neuman
> Neustar, Inc. / Vice President, Law & Policy
>  
>  
> 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.
>  
>  
>  
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mike O'Connor [mailto:mike@xxxxxxxxxx] 
> Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2010 9:27 AM
> To: Neuman, Jeff
> Cc: Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] New version of the report-draft candidate -- now 
> Version 5
>  
> eh?  V4 and V5 poll results look the same to me.  are we looking at the same 
> spot?  right around line 268-273 depending on which draft?
>  
> note that the columns have changed from Ron's draft -- his draft followed my 
> convention of combining the Support and Live-With numbers in one column.  
> this version breaks them apart and doesn't add them together.  there was a 
> sub-thread about that...
>  
> mikey
>  
>  
> On Jul 21, 2010, at 8:21 AM, Neuman, Jeff wrote:
>  
> > Mikey,
> > I know you said no content changes, but the poll results are off.....I 
> > think columns are mixed up.....
> > 
> > Jeffrey J. Neuman
> > Neustar, Inc. / Vice President, Law & Policy
> > 
> > 
> > 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.
> > 
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx] 
> > On Behalf Of Mike O'Connor
> > Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2010 9:10 AM
> > To: Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: [gnso-vi-feb10] New version of the report-draft candidate -- now 
> > Version 5
> > 
> > 
> > all hail Margie and Marika!
> > 
> > Marika updated the report and fixed a whole bunch of formatting problems in 
> > the draft i published last night.  the latest version is Version 5, out on 
> > the wiki at;
> > 
> >     
> > https://st.icann.org/vert-integration-pdp/index.cgi?initial_report_snapshots
> > 
> > this version is strictly a formatting revision, no content changes.  but 
> > it's the one you should use because line-numbers have changed a bit from my 
> > draft.
> > 
> > thanks!
> > 
> > mikey
> > 
> > - - - - - - - - -
> > phone     651-647-6109 
> > fax             866-280-2356 
> > web       http://www.haven2.com
> > handle    OConnorStP (ID for public places like Twitter, Facebook, Google, 
> > etc.)
> > 
>  
> - - - - - - - - -
> phone       651-647-6109 
> fax         866-280-2356 
> web   http://www.haven2.com
> handle      OConnorStP (ID for public places like Twitter, Facebook, Google, 
> etc.)
>  
> <VI SurveySummary_07202010_bac.xls>
>  
> - - - - - - - - -
> phone    651-647-6109  
> fax                          866-280-2356  
> web        http://www.haven2.com
> handle   OConnorStP (ID for public places like Twitter, Facebook, Google, 
> etc.)
>  
> 
> Please NOTE: This electronic message, including any attachments, may include 
> privileged, confidential and/or inside information owned by Demand Media, 
> Inc. Any distribution or use of this communication by anyone other than the 
> intended recipient(s) is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are 
> not the intended recipient, please notify the sender by replying to this 
> message and then delete it from your system. Thank you.