Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] Group on documenting "harms"

[Eric Brunner-Williams <ebw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 7/28/10 9:31 AM, Neuman, Jeff wrote:

> ... those that never operated a registry and a registrar together ...

I agree that assertions offered without operational experience have 
limited value. However, the scope of relevant operational experience 
goes to more than registry and registrar operations. The secondary 
market, in which some (few) registrars function as registries, and 
some (many) domainers, including some (few) registrars, function as 
registrars, offers insight into the design of systems in which the 
operational experience has value.
Eric


> ----- Original Message -----
> From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx<owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx>
> To: Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx<Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Wed Jul 28 01:48:29 2010
> Subject: Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] Group on documenting "harms"
>
>
>
> On 28 Jul 2010, at 03:06, Antony Van Couvering wrote:
>
> > Let's prioritize for harms that are dangerous AND most likely to occur.
> I think after the Harms Sub Team lists all of the possible harms, setting these 
> two values may be a good use for another of Mikey's polls were we each rate the 
> degree of harm (H)  and the likelihood of  the harm occurring (L) on a 5 point 
> scale.
>
> then to arrive at the ranking factor =  H * L
>
> and then averaging and showing range for each defined harm.
>
> cheers,
>
> a.