ICANN ICANN Email List Archives


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

[gnso-wpm-dt] WPM Preliminary Status: Step 2

  • To: <gnso-wpm-dt@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: [gnso-wpm-dt] WPM Preliminary Status: Step 2
  • From: "Ken Bour" <ken.bour@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2010 15:08:31 -0400

WPM-DT Members:


I thought you might appreciate receiving a brief status report concerning
Step 2-Individual Councilor Ratings. 


As of this afternoon, 8 June, I have received 12 Councilor ratings
spreadsheets.   The deadline, as you may know, has been extended to 9 June
(tomorrow).   Happily, other than a few names/dates being left off (I am
saving the emails and renaming the attachments so that I can positively ID
each one), the data aggregation process is going as planned and tested.   No
one, thus far, has failed to provide a 1-7 rating for each of the Eligible


You may be interested, if not surprised, to learn that not a single project
can be excluded from discussion after the individual rating step.   Every
project's Range is already > 2 and, of course, it cannot get any tighter as
more results are received.   Of the 15 Eligible Projects:   

.         11 or 73% have a Range >= 5 

.         7 or 46% have a Range = 6 (max)


I have developed a consolidation spreadsheet, which is automatically
color-coded to reveal the top/bottom ratings and the most prevalent answer
(or Mode).   Fortunately, several projects have pretty stable
Mode/Median/Mean results meaning that, while we might have a couple of 7's
and 1's (thus Range=6), most participants rated the project similarly.   In
a few cases, the Mode, Median, and Mean are the identical value indicating
strong central tendency (so far)!   In those instances, at least
theoretically, it should be possible to influence the small number of
outliers to move closer to the group's most common rating.   Even if that is
not possible, after discussion, it will be somewhat comforting to know that
there was reasonably strong agreement statistically.  


For Brussels, I estimate that we will have about 105 minutes net (if we can
hold preliminaries to 15), which leaves an average of 7 minutes per project
for discussion and polling.   


I am currently drafting a letter that I plan to send out early next week
(14th or 15th) addressing as many preliminaries as possible so that the
Brussels meeting (on Saturday morning) can be quickly focused on the group
ratings discussions.   This letter will cover such topics as:   Councilor
Preparation, Meeting Setup, Guiding Principles, and Process Flow (briefly).
I will be encouraging participants to arrive a few minutes early so that we
can speed up the routine process of settling in. 


If WPM-DT members would like to preview the letter before it goes out,
please let me know.   Although I recognize that you are all very busy, I
would appreciate another set of eyes on this next communication...  




Ken Bour


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy