[soac-newgtldapsup-wg] standards of agreement per August 2 agenda

[Karla Valente <karla.valente@xxxxxxxxx>]

Dear Carlton, Rafik,

Below are the standards of agreement I understand you both directed staff to 
use for the Final Report. Seth will continue to adopt this standard, unless we 
hear from you otherwise. These are the same used in the first Milestone Report.

NOTE: The main issue for staff now is to have clear direction where to apply 
these terms throughout the document and capture the correct views and 
conclusions of the WG members, which is not always clear based on the 
discussions (e-mails and transcripts).

Standards of Agreement

The WG followed specific guidelines to demonstrate the various levels of views 
and conclusions in this Report. The following was used throughout the document:

i.              Unanimous or full consensus, when no one in the group speaks 
against the recommendation in its last readings;
ii.             Rough or near consensus - a position where only a small 
minority disagrees but most agree.  This is sometimes referred to as consensus;
iii.            Strong support but significant opposition - a position where 
while most of the group supports a recommendation, there are a significant 
number of those who do not support it;
iv.           No consensus, also referred to as divergence - a position where 
there in not a strong support for any particular position, but many different 
points of view.  Sometimes this is due to irreconcilable differences of opinion 
and sometimes it is due to the fact that no one has a particularly strong or 
convincing viewpoint, but the members of the group agree that it is worth 
listing the issue in the report nonetheless;
v.            Minority refers to a proposal where a small number of people 
support the recommendation. This can happen in response to a Consensus, Strong 
Support but Significant Opposition, and No Consensus, or can happen in cases 
where there is neither support nor opposition to suggestion made by a small 
number of individuals.

In cases of Consensus, Strong Support but Significant Opposition, and No 
Consensus, an effort is made to document that variance in viewpoints and to 
present any Minority recommendations that may have been made. The documentation 
of Minority recommendation normally depends on text offered by the proponent.



Thank you,

Karla Valente
Director, gTLD Registry Programs
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
Direct:  + 1 310 301 3878
Mobile:  +1 310 936 4639
Skype: kdlvalente