RE: [gnso-whois-study] Whois Hypotheses WG Meeting Agenda for 8 July 2008

["Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I think so but Glen just sent them again.

Chuck 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tim Ruiz [mailto:tim@xxxxxxxxxxx] 
> Sent: Monday, July 07, 2008 4:12 PM
> To: Gomes, Chuck
> Cc: Glen_de_Saint_Géry; Liz Gasster; gnso-whois-study@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [gnso-whois-study] Whois Hypotheses WG Meeting 
> Agenda for 8 July 2008
> 
> Were call in details distributed for this? 
>  
> Tim 
> 
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: [gnso-whois-study] Whois Hypotheses WG Meeting 
> Agenda for 8 July 2008
> From: "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Fri, July 04, 2008 6:12 pm
> To: <gnso-whois-study@xxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Glen_de_Saint_Géry <Glen@xxxxxxxxx>, "Liz Gasster"
> <liz.gasster@xxxxxxxxx>
> 
> Attached and pasted below is the Whois Hypotheses WG Meeting 
> Agenda for
> 8 July 2008.  Also attached is a list of draft hypotheses 
> prepared by Chuck.
>  
> In preparation for our first meeting please familiarize 
> yourself with the following document:  ?Summary of Public 
> Suggestions on Further Studies of WHOIS including the GAC 
> recommendations of 16 April Updated 10 May 2008? found at 
> http://gnso.icann.org/issues/whois/whois-study-suggestion-repo
> rt-10may08.pdf
>  
> Chuck
>  
> Proposed Agenda
>  
> 
> Meeting Agenda for Whois Hypotheses Group
> 8 July 2008
>  
> Note:  The meeting will be recorded.Chuck will prepare and 
> distribute a brief summary of the actions taken as soon as 
> possible after the
> meeting.                  
> 
> 
>  
> 1.      Welcome
> 2.      Roll call (Glen)
> 3.      Agenda approval
> 4.      Task:
> a.       GNSO Resolution 20080625-3: ?To reconvene another group of
> volunteers, which may include members of the earlier group 
> and/or new volunteers to:
> ·        Review the study recommendations offered through the public
> comment period and the studies requested by the GAC and, 
> based on those recommendations and that request, prepare a 
> concise list of hypotheses.
> ·        Deliver a report containing the above with any supporting
> rationale to the Council within 6 weeks.
> ·        The Council will then decide whether any potential studies
> should be further considered, and if so, identify hypotheses 
> that it would like the staff to determine cost, feasibility, 
> potential methodology, and estimated time frames for testing.?
> b.      Key reference document: 
> ·        ?Summary of Public Suggestions on Further Studies of WHOIS
> including the GAC recommendations of 16 April Updated 10 May 
> 2008? found at 
> http://gnso.icann.org/issues/whois/whois-study-suggestion-repo
> rt-10may08.pdf
> 
> c.       Deliverable: A report listing the hypotheses for the Whois
> study recommendations submitted in the public comment period 
> and by the GAC as contained in the reference document above.
> d.      Due date: 6 August 2008
> e.       Note:
> ·        Hypotheses for some of the suggested studies are already
> stated clearly.
> ·        Hypotheses for some of the suggested studies need to be
> inferred from the information provided.
> ·        Some proposed studies may have more than one hypothesis to be
> studied.
> ·        Chuck took an initial crack at listing some hypotheses.
> 5.      Methodology
> a.       Examine each suggested study one at a time in the order they
> are presented in the above referenced study report and 
> develop concise one sentence hypotheses to be tested.
> b.      Use Chuck?s draft list of hypotheses strictly as a means of
> facilitating the task; the group may use them, modify them 
> and/or discard them.
> c.       Every effort will be made to achieve maximum consensus on the
> wording of the hypotheses.
> 6.      Confirm methodology
> a.       Comments or questions?
> b.      Suggested changes.
> c.       Approve methodology
> 7.      Meetings
> a.       Unless otherwise decided by the group: Tuesdays at 15:00 UTC
> [08:00 PDT (California), 10:00 CDT (Cedar Rapids), 11:00 EDT 
> (Washington DC), 16:00 BST (London), 17:00 CEST (Brussels), etc.].
> b.      We will meet until we finish.
> c.       It will be the responsibility of group members who miss
> meetings to review the meeting notes provided by Chuck, to 
> listen to the recording and to submit any input on the list 
> at list 24 hours before the next meeting.
> 8.      Development of hypotheses
> a.       Whois misuse studies (#1, #14, #15 and #21 and GAC #2)
> b.      Compliance with data protection laws and Registrar 
> Accreditation
> Agreement (#16, #22, #23, #24, #12, #13, #14)
> c.       Availability of privacy services (#2, #5, #7, #8)
> d.      Demand and motivation for use of privacy services (#17, #18,
> #19, #9, #10)
> e.       Impact of WHOIS data protection on crime and abuse (#6, #13,
> #11, #1, #2)
> f.         Proxy registrar compliance with law enforcement and dispute
> resolution requests (#3, #20, Metalitz comment, #12)
> g.       Whois data accuracy (#8, # 11)
> h.       Other GAC recommendations (GAC #1, GAC #5, GAC #6, GAC #3)
> 9.      Next meeting:  Tuesday, 15 July 2008, 15:00 UTC
> 10.  Action items
> a.       Chuck: Prepare and distribute meeting notes NLT 9 July
> b.      Liz: Prepare and distribute list of completed hypotheses NLT 9
> July
> c.       Other?
>  
> 
> 
>