RE: [gnso-wpm-dt] WPM-DT: Step 3a (Rating Test #1 - In Progress)
Please see my responses below. Chuck _____ From: owner-gnso-wpm-dt@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-wpm-dt@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Stéphane Van Gelder Sent: Monday, December 14, 2009 9:40 AM To: Ken Bour Cc: gnso-wpm-dt@xxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: [gnso-wpm-dt] WPM-DT: Step 3a (Rating Test #1 - In Progress) Thanks Ken, Please find attached my contribution. A few comments: - I did not deem it necessary or even desirable to take the time to go back to the RrSG in order to get feedback on rating. I consider this a test and the points awarded only reflect my own personal judgment or experience. - For the X axis, I consider the higher the number of points, the less desirable the project (as it is consuming more resources). [Gomes, Chuck] Not sure I agree with this if I correctly understand. New gTLDs would have been an undesirable project using this logic. It certainly would have been rated very high on the X axis and rightly so but that would not make it undesirable. Maybe it is just a matter of not suggesting that a high X axis rating does not mean desirable or undesirable projects. This is reversed for the Y axis (the more points awarded, the more a project is worthy of the GNSO's attention).[Gomes, Chuck] Again, I am not sure this will always be true. If this is consistent with everyone else's understanding, it may be worthwhile making this very clear once the definitive rating instructions are sent to the Council. - I found the X axis very difficult to rate. It is impossible for me to have a clear idea of the amount of budgetary resources a project requires without having some kind of figure in front of me from staff. Would it be worthwhile thinking about putting such a figure next to each project description listed in the word document that came with Ken's email?[Gomes, Chuck] Keep in mind that budgetary info is just one aspect and that it may be very difficult to get reasonable budgetary estimates early in the game. For existing projects it will be much easier to estimate budget impact; for new ones, it will be more challenging. If we ask for budget estimates from Staff to perform this exercise, it will take us too long to do it. At the same time, each Councilor should be able estimate resources required on a comparative basis at a high level so as to be able to complete the exercise. - I was surprised when rating to find that projects that tended to be of lower value (according to me) also tended to require less resources (less man hours spent on them, less expensive). I think there's something in that, still trying to work out what it is ;)[Gomes, Chuck] I think this illustrates what I tried to say above. Just because something requires smaller amount of resources doesn't mean we should do it. Thanks, Stéphane Attachment:
smime.p7s
|