Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] Poll Chart

[Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>]

hi,

what we, collectively, did most was object, so putting the object count first 
has a certain poetic beauty.

a.


On 21 Jul 2010, at 17:00, Jothan Frakes wrote:

> +1 Spot on.  Take Jeff's suggestion and begin with the Objections column.
> 
> Jothan Frakes
> +1.206-355-0230 tel
> +1.206-201-6881 fax
> 
> 
> On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 1:39 PM, Richard Tindal <richardtindal@xxxxxx> wrote:
> 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.
> 
>