Re: [Capacity-Building-WG] Survey
Dear Tijani, For the many reasons shared in Durban, I feel that the Survey should not be merged. The Capacity Building Survey is for the long term capacity building of the At Large and not limited to the Summit. Secondly, the people attending the Summit are just one or two people from the ALS. However, the type of feedback and respondents of the capacity building survey are not just ALSes but also more importantly, the view of those (individuals) within ALSes that participate in the At Large or ICANN processes. There has been work done for months in cleaning up up the data in relation to the ALS as far as contact details are concerned which is the responsibility of the RALO Secretariat and the ALS to constantly update. There has been in the past inconsistent recording by Staff but this was picked up by the working group in the cleaning up process and highlighted to staff. The Capacity Building Survey has a specific objective and merging the ATLAS Survey will not help us fulfill our quest if we reduce our questions to cater for the ATLAS. Kind Regards, Sala Sent from my iPad On Sep 22, 2013, at 12:15 AM, "Tijani BENJEMAA" <tijani.benjemaa@topnet.tn> wrote:
Dear all,
I proposed to Wolf to merge the ATLAS II and the Capacity Building surveys for the following reasons: · Both surveys are urgent since both are needed for the Summit II · If not merged, they will be distributed in the same period, which will produce a confusion and may lead to inconsistent answers or very few ALSes responding · The only disadvantage of merging them is that it will result in a very long survey that may discourage the ALSes to go through it. · The proposal is to conceive a survey of 3 parts: o Section 1: ALS Details o Section 2: Part dedicated to ATLAS II WG o Section 3: Part dedicated to Capacity Building WG · Section 1 will be very short to provide up to date contacts and languages used · Section 2 will be finalized by the ATLAS II survey sub-group · Section 3 will be a very short part for Capacity Building
To make things practical, I’m proposing in the attached file: · What the CB WG thinks it could be section 1 · Section 3 as shortened by a small team in the CB WG (Dev, Carlos and myself).
I want to remind you that for the ATLAS II summit, the ALSes need to be prepared for an effective and efficient participation, and the CBWG is in charge of such preparation. That’s why the CBWG needs this section of the survey.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tijani BEN JEMAA Executive Director Mediterranean Federation of Internet Associations (FMAI) Phone: + 216 41 649 605 Mobile: + 216 98 330 114 Fax: + 216 70 853 376 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<Survey_CB section_Draft.docx> _______________________________________________ capacity-building-wg mailing list capacity-building-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/capacity-building-wg
Dear Sala, Thank you for your mail. I know a lot of work has been done on the CB WG survey, and I absolutely agree wit you that it’s for long term capacity building purpose. That’s why I said in different mail that the comprehensive CBWG survey will be postponed not to make the ALSes confused when they receive 2 surveys in the same period. Please be assured that it will be done after the summit. It’s only because we have the duty to prepare the ALSes for the summit for a real and active participation that we need this small part of the survey very soon. And when I say merging, I don’t mean merging the whole surveys; it would be too long for the ALSes and may give negative result. Have a nice week-end. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tijani BEN JEMAA Executive Director Mediterranean Federation of Internet Associations (FMAI) Phone: + 216 41 649 605 Mobile: + 216 98 330 114 Fax: + 216 70 853 376 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- De : Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro [mailto:salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro@gmail.com] Envoyé : samedi 21 septembre 2013 19:51 À : tijani.benjemaa@topnet.tn Cc : At-Large Capacity Building WG; <atlas-ii@atlarge-lists.icann.org>; Wolf Ludwig Objet : Re: [Capacity-Building-WG] Survey Dear Tijani, For the many reasons shared in Durban, I feel that the Survey should not be merged. The Capacity Building Survey is for the long term capacity building of the At Large and not limited to the Summit. Secondly, the people attending the Summit are just one or two people from the ALS. However, the type of feedback and respondents of the capacity building survey are not just ALSes but also more importantly, the view of those (individuals) within ALSes that participate in the At Large or ICANN processes. There has been work done for months in cleaning up up the data in relation to the ALS as far as contact details are concerned which is the responsibility of the RALO Secretariat and the ALS to constantly update. There has been in the past inconsistent recording by Staff but this was picked up by the working group in the cleaning up process and highlighted to staff. The Capacity Building Survey has a specific objective and merging the ATLAS Survey will not help us fulfill our quest if we reduce our questions to cater for the ATLAS. Kind Regards, Sala Sent from my iPad On Sep 22, 2013, at 12:15 AM, "Tijani BENJEMAA" <tijani.benjemaa@topnet.tn> wrote: Dear all, I proposed to Wolf to merge the ATLAS II and the Capacity Building surveys for the following reasons: · Both surveys are urgent since both are needed for the Summit II · If not merged, they will be distributed in the same period, which will produce a confusion and may lead to inconsistent answers or very few ALSes responding · The only disadvantage of merging them is that it will result in a very long survey that may discourage the ALSes to go through it. · The proposal is to conceive a survey of 3 parts: o Section 1: ALS Details o Section 2: Part dedicated to ATLAS II WG o Section 3: Part dedicated to Capacity Building WG · Section 1 will be very short to provide up to date contacts and languages used · Section 2 will be finalized by the ATLAS II survey sub-group · Section 3 will be a very short part for Capacity Building To make things practical, I’m proposing in the attached file: · What the CB WG thinks it could be section 1 · Section 3 as shortened by a small team in the CB WG (Dev, Carlos and myself). I want to remind you that for the ATLAS II summit, the ALSes need to be prepared for an effective and efficient participation, and the CBWG is in charge of such preparation. That’s why the CBWG needs this section of the survey. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tijani BEN JEMAA Executive Director Mediterranean Federation of Internet Associations (FMAI) Phone: + 216 41 649 605 Mobile: + 216 98 330 114 Fax: + 216 70 853 376 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- <Survey_CB section_Draft.docx> _______________________________________________ capacity-building-wg mailing list capacity-building-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/capacity-building-wg
Hi Sala, There was a pretty clear consensus for merge on the recent call. I don't think anyone was contemplating reducing questions, as much as 1) avoiding having to fill out the same info twice, and 2) optimizing participation. In the latter interest there was anecdotal evidence of the efficacy (in the recent NARALO ROP vote) of single-minded and persistent repeated reminders from both staff and regional leaders - an effort that would not bear repeating in the short term. I think most were aware of your position and arguments, as you did make them forcefully earlier. joly On Sat, Sep 21, 2013 at 2:50 PM, Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro < salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Tijani,
For the many reasons shared in Durban, I feel that the Survey should not be merged. The Capacity Building Survey is for the long term capacity building of the At Large and not limited to the Summit. Secondly, the people attending the Summit are just one or two people from the ALS.
However, the type of feedback and respondents of the capacity building survey are not just ALSes but also more importantly, the view of those (individuals) within ALSes that participate in the At Large or ICANN processes.
There has been work done for months in cleaning up up the data in relation to the ALS as far as contact details are concerned which is the responsibility of the RALO Secretariat and the ALS to constantly update. There has been in the past inconsistent recording by Staff but this was picked up by the working group in the cleaning up process and highlighted to staff.
The Capacity Building Survey has a specific objective and merging the ATLAS Survey will not help us fulfill our quest if we reduce our questions to cater for the ATLAS.
Kind Regards, Sala
Sent from my iPad
On Sep 22, 2013, at 12:15 AM, "Tijani BENJEMAA" <tijani.benjemaa@topnet.tn> wrote:
Dear all,****
** **
I proposed to Wolf to merge the ATLAS II and the Capacity Building surveys for the following reasons:****
· Both surveys are urgent since both are needed for the Summit II * ***
· If not merged, they will be distributed in the same period, which will produce a confusion and may lead to inconsistent answers or very few ALSes responding ****
· The only disadvantage of merging them is that it will result in a very long survey that may discourage the ALSes to go through it.****
· The proposal is to conceive a survey of 3 parts:****
o Section 1: ALS Details****
o Section 2: Part dedicated to ATLAS II WG****
o Section 3: Part dedicated to Capacity Building WG****
· Section 1 will be very short to provide up to date contacts and languages used****
· Section 2 will be finalized by the ATLAS II survey sub-group****
· Section 3 will be a very short part for Capacity Building****
** **
To make things practical, I’m proposing in the attached file:****
· What the CB WG thinks it could be section 1****
· Section 3 as shortened by a small team in the CB WG (Dev, Carlos and myself).****
** **
I want to remind you that for the ATLAS II summit, the ALSes need to be prepared for an effective and efficient participation, and the CBWG is in charge of such preparation. That’s why the CBWG needs this section of the survey.****
** **
** **
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ****
*Tijani BEN JEMAA*
Executive Director****
Mediterranean Federation of Internet Associations (*FMAI*)****
Phone: + 216 41 649 605****
Mobile: + 216 98 330 114****
Fax: + 216 70 853 376****
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ****
****
** **
****
<Survey_CB section_Draft.docx>
_______________________________________________ capacity-building-wg mailing list capacity-building-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/capacity-building-wg
_______________________________________________ capacity-building-wg mailing list capacity-building-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/capacity-building-wg
-- --------------------------------------------------------------- Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org -------------------------------------------------------------- -
Hello, as some of you may recall, I was originally against merging these surveys and outlined my arguments before. In the meantime, there were some strong arguments for merging them brought forward by Tijani and others and I noted that under the given circumstances (narrow timing, avoiding confusion etc.) it might be a sort of "best" solution, if it's properly done and explained / communicated. And I think that this solution will find a broad majority among the two sub-groups. As said before, I have very limited Internet access this week here in Lisbon and I cannot assure my availability for tomorrow's call. From the ATLAS II Survey sub-group there is a good *revised draft* from Dharma on the table what should be discussed as the input from our side. Wish you all the best for your call. Regards, Wolf Joly MacFie wrote Mon, 23 Sep 2013 03:52:
Hi Sala,
There was a pretty clear consensus for merge on the recent call. I don't think anyone was contemplating reducing questions, as much as 1) avoiding having to fill out the same info twice, and 2) optimizing participation.
In the latter interest there was anecdotal evidence of the efficacy (in the recent NARALO ROP vote) of single-minded and persistent repeated reminders from both staff and regional leaders - an effort that would not bear repeating in the short term.
I think most were aware of your position and arguments, as you did make them forcefully earlier.
joly
On Sat, Sep 21, 2013 at 2:50 PM, Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro < salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Tijani,
For the many reasons shared in Durban, I feel that the Survey should not be merged. The Capacity Building Survey is for the long term capacity building of the At Large and not limited to the Summit. Secondly, the people attending the Summit are just one or two people from the ALS.
However, the type of feedback and respondents of the capacity building survey are not just ALSes but also more importantly, the view of those (individuals) within ALSes that participate in the At Large or ICANN processes.
There has been work done for months in cleaning up up the data in relation to the ALS as far as contact details are concerned which is the responsibility of the RALO Secretariat and the ALS to constantly update. There has been in the past inconsistent recording by Staff but this was picked up by the working group in the cleaning up process and highlighted to staff.
The Capacity Building Survey has a specific objective and merging the ATLAS Survey will not help us fulfill our quest if we reduce our questions to cater for the ATLAS.
Kind Regards, Sala
Sent from my iPad
On Sep 22, 2013, at 12:15 AM, "Tijani BENJEMAA" <tijani.benjemaa@topnet.tn> wrote:
Dear all,****
** **
I proposed to Wolf to merge the ATLAS II and the Capacity Building surveys for the following reasons:****
· Both surveys are urgent since both are needed for the Summit II * ***
· If not merged, they will be distributed in the same period, which will produce a confusion and may lead to inconsistent answers or very few ALSes responding ****
· The only disadvantage of merging them is that it will result in a very long survey that may discourage the ALSes to go through it.****
· The proposal is to conceive a survey of 3 parts:****
o Section 1: ALS Details****
o Section 2: Part dedicated to ATLAS II WG****
o Section 3: Part dedicated to Capacity Building WG****
· Section 1 will be very short to provide up to date contacts and languages used****
· Section 2 will be finalized by the ATLAS II survey sub-group****
· Section 3 will be a very short part for Capacity Building****
** **
To make things practical, I’m proposing in the attached file:****
· What the CB WG thinks it could be section 1****
· Section 3 as shortened by a small team in the CB WG (Dev, Carlos and myself).****
** **
I want to remind you that for the ATLAS II summit, the ALSes need to be prepared for an effective and efficient participation, and the CBWG is in charge of such preparation. That’s why the CBWG needs this section of the survey.****
** **
** **
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ****
*Tijani BEN JEMAA*
Executive Director****
Mediterranean Federation of Internet Associations (*FMAI*)****
Phone: + 216 41 649 605****
Mobile: + 216 98 330 114****
Fax: + 216 70 853 376****
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ****
****
** **
****
<Survey_CB section_Draft.docx>
_______________________________________________ capacity-building-wg mailing list capacity-building-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/capacity-building-wg
_______________________________________________ capacity-building-wg mailing list capacity-building-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/capacity-building-wg
-- --------------------------------------------------------------- Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org -------------------------------------------------------------- -
EuroDIG Secretariat http://www.eurodig.org/ mobile +41 79 204 83 87 Skype: Wolf-Ludwig EURALO - ICANN's Regional At-Large Organisation http://euralo.org Profile on LinkedIn http://ch.linkedin.com/in/wolfludwig
Well since Wolf has been persuaded, merge it then. Sala On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 12:51 PM, Wolf Ludwig <wolf.ludwig@comunica-ch.net>wrote:
Hello,
as some of you may recall, I was originally against merging these surveys and outlined my arguments before. In the meantime, there were some strong arguments for merging them brought forward by Tijani and others and I noted that under the given circumstances (narrow timing, avoiding confusion etc.) it might be a sort of "best" solution, if it's properly done and explained / communicated. And I think that this solution will find a broad majority among the two sub-groups.
As said before, I have very limited Internet access this week here in Lisbon and I cannot assure my availability for tomorrow's call. From the ATLAS II Survey sub-group there is a good *revised draft* from Dharma on the table what should be discussed as the input from our side.
Wish you all the best for your call. Regards, Wolf
Joly MacFie wrote Mon, 23 Sep 2013 03:52:
Hi Sala,
There was a pretty clear consensus for merge on the recent call. I don't think anyone was contemplating reducing questions, as much as 1) avoiding having to fill out the same info twice, and 2) optimizing participation.
In the latter interest there was anecdotal evidence of the efficacy (in the recent NARALO ROP vote) of single-minded and persistent repeated reminders from both staff and regional leaders - an effort that would not bear repeating in the short term.
I think most were aware of your position and arguments, as you did make them forcefully earlier.
joly
On Sat, Sep 21, 2013 at 2:50 PM, Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro < salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Tijani,
For the many reasons shared in Durban, I feel that the Survey should not be merged. The Capacity Building Survey is for the long term capacity building of the At Large and not limited to the Summit. Secondly, the people attending the Summit are just one or two people from the ALS.
However, the type of feedback and respondents of the capacity building survey are not just ALSes but also more importantly, the view of those (individuals) within ALSes that participate in the At Large or ICANN processes.
There has been work done for months in cleaning up up the data in relation to the ALS as far as contact details are concerned which is the responsibility of the RALO Secretariat and the ALS to constantly update. There has been in the past inconsistent recording by Staff but this was picked up by the working group in the cleaning up process and highlighted to staff.
The Capacity Building Survey has a specific objective and merging the ATLAS Survey will not help us fulfill our quest if we reduce our questions to cater for the ATLAS.
Kind Regards, Sala
Sent from my iPad
On Sep 22, 2013, at 12:15 AM, "Tijani BENJEMAA" < tijani.benjemaa@topnet.tn> wrote:
Dear all,****
** **
I proposed to Wolf to merge the ATLAS II and the Capacity Building surveys for the following reasons:****
· Both surveys are urgent since both are needed for the Summit II * ***
· If not merged, they will be distributed in the same period, which will produce a confusion and may lead to inconsistent answers or very few ALSes responding ****
· The only disadvantage of merging them is that it will result in a very long survey that may discourage the ALSes to go through it.****
· The proposal is to conceive a survey of 3 parts:****
o Section 1: ALS Details****
o Section 2: Part dedicated to ATLAS II WG****
o Section 3: Part dedicated to Capacity Building WG****
· Section 1 will be very short to provide up to date contacts and languages used****
· Section 2 will be finalized by the ATLAS II survey sub-group****
· Section 3 will be a very short part for Capacity Building****
** **
To make things practical, I’m proposing in the attached file:****
· What the CB WG thinks it could be section 1****
· Section 3 as shortened by a small team in the CB WG (Dev, Carlos and myself).****
** **
I want to remind you that for the ATLAS II summit, the ALSes need to be prepared for an effective and efficient participation, and the CBWG is in charge of such preparation. That’s why the CBWG needs this section of the survey.****
** **
** **
****
*Tijani BEN JEMAA*
Executive Director****
Mediterranean Federation of Internet Associations (*FMAI*)****
Phone: + 216 41 649 605****
Mobile: + 216 98 330 114****
Fax: + 216 70 853 376****
****
****
** **
****
<Survey_CB section_Draft.docx>
_______________________________________________ capacity-building-wg mailing list capacity-building-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/capacity-building-wg
_______________________________________________ capacity-building-wg mailing list capacity-building-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/capacity-building-wg
-- --------------------------------------------------------------- Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org -------------------------------------------------------------- -
EuroDIG Secretariat http://www.eurodig.org/ mobile +41 79 204 83 87 Skype: Wolf-Ludwig
EURALO - ICANN's Regional At-Large Organisation http://euralo.org
Profile on LinkedIn http://ch.linkedin.com/in/wolfludwig
-- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 Blog: salanieta.blogspot.com
Dear all, Please find attached the final version of the consolidated survey as modified according to the comments received by mail and those of the Tuesday call. Heidi, please transmit it to the language service for translation to French and Spanish. Matt proposed BigPulse for the survey, and I find it a wise choice because we have experience with BigPulse and Matt is familiar with their system. Also, when translated, can Dev and Matt put it in the online format to be handled by BigPulse? I think we are on the right way. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- Tijani BEN JEMAA Executive Director Mediterranean Federation of Internet Associations (FMAI) Phone: + 216 41 649 605 Mobile: + 216 98 330 114 Fax: + 216 70 853 376 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----
participants (5)
-
Joly MacFie -
Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro -
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro
-
Tijani BENJEMAA -
Wolf Ludwig