RES: [gnso-wpm-dt] WPM: Step 4-Publication of Ratings

["Jaime B Wagner" <j@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I agree Ken

 

Jaime Wagner
j@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

cel: +55(51)8126-0916

dir: +55(51)3219-5955

 

De: owner-gnso-wpm-dt@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-wpm-dt@xxxxxxxxx] Em nome
de Ken Bour
Enviada em: segunda-feira, 14 de junho de 2010 16:03
Para: gnso-wpm-dt@xxxxxxxxx
Assunto: [gnso-wpm-dt] WPM: Step 4-Publication of Ratings

 

WPM-DT Members:

 

I started to think about how the final Council Project Value Ratings might
be published on the GNSO website (Step 4).   Initially, I thought about
showing the individual Councilor ratings along with the final ones produced
by the group discussion.   After further consideration, the individual
Councilor ratings were merely a precursor to facilitating the group session.
Although we can certainly make them and that process transparent (perhaps as
part of a subsequent public comment period), it seems as though the final
Council ratings resulting from the collaborative group session should stand
alone.  

 

I suggest that we post the final Value Ratings in a modified Project List
document.  See Table 1 of my attached proposal.   

 

I recommend that we re-sort Table 1 first by Value Rating (high to low),
then alphabetically by Project Name (for ties).   I would let the column 1
Sequence Numbers be auto reset (1-15) since they are only there for
reference.   

 

Please also note that I added a third table (just before the Glossary) to
contain the Value definition and the Rating Scale that applies.   I also
added a footnote to indicate where the procedures can be located that
explains how these numbers were developed.   

 

If you concur, we can convert this document to a PDF and place it on the
GNSO website.   One possible location (pending the new GNSO website) would
be at the top of the "Issues" (http://gnso.icann.org/issues/) page.   If
anyone has a better idea for its temporary home, please let me know.  

 

If all goes well in Brussels on the 19th, this document could be prepared in
time to share with the Council at its 23 June meeting and, if approved,
posted to the GNSO website in accordance with the resolution that Olga will
be making later today.  

 

I look forward to your thoughts.   

 

Ken