Feedback on EPDP Form Community Questions
Dear All, Further to the AI from today’s CPWG call, please see below feedback on EPDP form community questions. Thanks to all for productive feedback regarding the form. * Community concern about the Google Form “harvesting all the information” submitted via the form. It was noted ICANN org and community use forms already, but this would be first time for public comment process. The comments are also public, but the concern was Google retention of the data. Any ALAC members concerned with Google’s retention of data may submit comments by filling out the word version of the form and sending it to At-Large Staff staff@atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> or policy-staff@icann.org<mailto:policy-staff@icann.org>. * Alternatives to the form. It was noted that for some in the world (i.e. in China), Google products are not available. Is there an official alternative submission method? One could use a Word Doc or PDF of the form. In general, the community wanted to know rationale for using Google forms for the whole process, as opposed to a fillable PDF, or Word doc template for comments? To facilitate offline work, or for those who may not have access to the form, you may download an offline version of the form here: https://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/epdp-gtld-registration-data-specs-public-co.... Please submit completed forms to At-Large Staff staff@atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> or policy-staff@icann.org<mailto:policy-staff@icann.org>. EPDP Leadership chose to utilize Google Forms because Google automatically sorts and organizes answers to questions, which will expedite the process of compiling comments received. For more information, anyone interested may refer to the EPDP Leadership webinar<https://community.icann.org/display/EOTSFGRD/2018-11-29+EPDP+Initial+Report+...>, during which the rationale for and explanation of the Google Form is described. * Public visibility of draft mode. It was noted you may save progress on the Google Form, then submit later, but that the saved work was public. This was seen as undesirable by many in the community. Is there a way to not have the draft/saved form public; only have the final submission public? Commenters have the option of using the word version to work offline and then can complete the Google form when finished. We are not aware of a way to save progress privately on Google Forms. * Concerns with mistakes in the form submission process. The suggested alternative to the above was working from a Word doc, then copying + pasting over. The concern was the potential for mistakes. If mistakes are made on the submission, as is currently done, would it be possible to remove or revise the submission to public comment? Yes. Commenters are able to edit their previous submission by following prompts in the email they will receive from Google. If the commenter would like to delete a submission, please notify policy-staff@icann.org<mailto:policy-staff@icann.org>, and EPDP Staff Support can assist. Kind Regards, Evin
On this point: EPDP Leadership chose to utilize Google Forms because Google automatically sorts and organizes answers to questions, which will expedite the process of compiling comments received. To put this in more concrete terms, Google Forms automatically flows the answers through to a spreadsheet, where each submitter gets their own row, and each question gets its own column. Voila, each each cell contains a single party’s answer to a single question. This saves untold hours of cutting and pasting. The spreadsheet also tabulates the answers to multiple choice questions. Think of the spreadsheet as the “admin view” of the Google Form. That is really where the magic happens. There may be ways to move answers in bulk from Word docs, spreadsheets or possibly even fillable PDFs. At a minimum this requires some care and precision in setting up the individual input document, so that a bulk transfer of data can be made to the master spreadsheet. Meanwhile Google Form just runs. I would love to find viable FOSS equivalents to Google Docs and Google Forms, but so far I haven’t. If one exists at all, and is workable, only then do we look at whether its privacy, confidentiality, data protection, etc., elements are superior to Google (one assumes they would be, but that’s up to the developer community). It would be a nice project for somebody. Maybe that auction money could support developing a platform for ICANN that does this stuff. Greg On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 10:12 AM Evin Erdogdu <evin.erdogdu@icann.org> wrote:
Dear All,
Further to the AI from today’s CPWG call, please see below feedback on EPDP form community questions.
Thanks to all for productive feedback regarding the form.
- *Community concern about the Google Form “harvesting all the information” submitted via the form.* It was noted ICANN org and community use forms already, but this would be first time for public comment process. The comments are also public, but the concern was Google retention of the data.
Any ALAC members concerned with Google’s retention of data may submit comments by filling out the word version of the form and sending it to At-Large Staff staff@atlarge.icann.org or policy-staff@icann.org.
- *Alternatives to the form.* It was noted that for some in the world (i.e. in China), Google products are not available. Is there an official alternative submission method? One could use a Word Doc or PDF of the form. In general, the community wanted to know rationale for using Google forms for the whole process, as opposed to a fillable PDF, or Word doc template for comments?
To facilitate offline work, or for those who may not have access to the form, you may download an offline version of the form here: https://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/epdp-gtld-registration-data-specs-public-co.... Please submit completed forms to At-Large Staff staff@atlarge.icann.org or policy-staff@icann.org.
EPDP Leadership chose to utilize Google Forms because Google automatically sorts and organizes answers to questions, which will expedite the process of compiling comments received.
For more information, anyone interested may refer to the EPDP Leadership webinar <https://community.icann.org/display/EOTSFGRD/2018-11-29+EPDP+Initial+Report+...>, during which the rationale for and explanation of the Google Form is described.
- *Public visibility of draft mode. *It was noted you may save progress on the Google Form, then submit later, but that the saved work was public. This was seen as undesirable by many in the community. Is there a way to not have the draft/saved form public; only have the final submission public?
Commenters have the option of using the word version to work offline and then can complete the Google form when finished. We are not aware of a way to save progress privately on Google Forms.
- *Concerns with mistakes in the form submission process*. The suggested alternative to the above was working from a Word doc, then copying + pasting over. The concern was the potential for mistakes. If mistakes are made on the submission, as is currently done, would it be possible to remove or revise the submission to public comment?
Yes. Commenters are able to edit their previous submission by following prompts in the email they will receive from Google. If the commenter would like to delete a submission, please notify policy-staff@icann.org, and EPDP Staff Support can assist.
Kind Regards,
Evin
_______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ GTLD-WG mailing list GTLD-WG@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gtld-wg
Working Group direct URL: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/New+GTLDs
I've come across TellForm before but have yet to test it out extensively so cannot say if it's a viable alternative to Google Forms. But I agree it's a consideration for another day though non-universal access to Google products is a legitimate concern IMO. In any case, for our purposes, Hadia and Alan are going with the available alternative of submission via Word document. So we're good. Justine ----- On Thu, 20 Dec 2018 at 00:20, Greg Shatan <greg@isoc-ny.org> wrote:
On this point:
EPDP Leadership chose to utilize Google Forms because Google automatically sorts and organizes answers to questions, which will expedite the process of compiling comments received.
To put this in more concrete terms, Google Forms automatically flows the answers through to a spreadsheet, where each submitter gets their own row, and each question gets its own column. Voila, each each cell contains a single party’s answer to a single question. This saves untold hours of cutting and pasting. The spreadsheet also tabulates the answers to multiple choice questions.
Think of the spreadsheet as the “admin view” of the Google Form. That is really where the magic happens.
There may be ways to move answers in bulk from Word docs, spreadsheets or possibly even fillable PDFs. At a minimum this requires some care and precision in setting up the individual input document, so that a bulk transfer of data can be made to the master spreadsheet. Meanwhile Google Form just runs.
I would love to find viable FOSS equivalents to Google Docs and Google Forms, but so far I haven’t. If one exists at all, and is workable, only then do we look at whether its privacy, confidentiality, data protection, etc., elements are superior to Google (one assumes they would be, but that’s up to the developer community). It would be a nice project for somebody. Maybe that auction money could support developing a platform for ICANN that does this stuff.
Greg
On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 10:12 AM Evin Erdogdu <evin.erdogdu@icann.org> wrote:
Dear All,
Further to the AI from today’s CPWG call, please see below feedback on EPDP form community questions.
Thanks to all for productive feedback regarding the form.
- *Community concern about the Google Form “harvesting all the information” submitted via the form.* It was noted ICANN org and community use forms already, but this would be first time for public comment process. The comments are also public, but the concern was Google retention of the data.
Any ALAC members concerned with Google’s retention of data may submit comments by filling out the word version of the form and sending it to At-Large Staff staff@atlarge.icann.org or policy-staff@icann.org.
- *Alternatives to the form.* It was noted that for some in the world (i.e. in China), Google products are not available. Is there an official alternative submission method? One could use a Word Doc or PDF of the form. In general, the community wanted to know rationale for using Google forms for the whole process, as opposed to a fillable PDF, or Word doc template for comments?
To facilitate offline work, or for those who may not have access to the form, you may download an offline version of the form here: https://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/epdp-gtld-registration-data-specs-public-co.... Please submit completed forms to At-Large Staff staff@atlarge.icann.org or policy-staff@icann.org.
EPDP Leadership chose to utilize Google Forms because Google automatically sorts and organizes answers to questions, which will expedite the process of compiling comments received.
For more information, anyone interested may refer to the EPDP Leadership webinar <https://community.icann.org/display/EOTSFGRD/2018-11-29+EPDP+Initial+Report+...>, during which the rationale for and explanation of the Google Form is described.
- *Public visibility of draft mode. *It was noted you may save progress on the Google Form, then submit later, but that the saved work was public. This was seen as undesirable by many in the community. Is there a way to not have the draft/saved form public; only have the final submission public?
Commenters have the option of using the word version to work offline and then can complete the Google form when finished. We are not aware of a way to save progress privately on Google Forms.
- *Concerns with mistakes in the form submission process*. The suggested alternative to the above was working from a Word doc, then copying + pasting over. The concern was the potential for mistakes. If mistakes are made on the submission, as is currently done, would it be possible to remove or revise the submission to public comment?
Yes. Commenters are able to edit their previous submission by following prompts in the email they will receive from Google. If the commenter would like to delete a submission, please notify policy-staff@icann.org, and EPDP Staff Support can assist.
Kind Regards,
Evin
_______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ GTLD-WG mailing list GTLD-WG@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gtld-wg
Working Group direct URL: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/New+GTLDs
_______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
We can, of course, take this up as a priority under TTF. However, it still may not address the issue, as *any* vendor who is giving us the service has the potential to snoop into the data. The only way would be to have ICANN's own in-house tool for collaborative working (some of the open source tools can be hosted on ICANN servers, so no software development may be required). The choice of such a tool would take time, and may not be a solution for the immediate term. satish On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 10:28 PM Judith Hellerstein <judith@jhellerstein.com> wrote:
HI All,
Let's add the topic of google forms or alternatives and the testing of these to this years work of the TTF. We could possibly do a table comparing all alternatives as one of projects for this year
Best,
Judith
_________________________________________________________________________ Judith Hellerstein, Founder & CEO Hellerstein & Associates 3001 Veazey Terrace NW, Washington DC 20008 Phone: (202) 362-5139 Skype ID: judithhellerstein Mobile/Whats app: +1202-333-6517 E-mail: Judith@jhellerstein.com Website: www.jhellerstein.com Linked In: www.linkedin.com/in/jhellerstein/ Opening Telecom & Technology Opportunities Worldwide
On 12/19/2018 11:54 AM, Justine Chew wrote:
I've come across TellForm before but have yet to test it out extensively so cannot say if it's a viable alternative to Google Forms.
But I agree it's a consideration for another day though non-universal access to Google products is a legitimate concern IMO. In any case, for our purposes, Hadia and Alan are going with the available alternative of submission via Word document. So we're good.
Justine -----
On Thu, 20 Dec 2018 at 00:20, Greg Shatan <greg@isoc-ny.org> wrote:
On this point:
EPDP Leadership chose to utilize Google Forms because Google automatically sorts and organizes answers to questions, which will expedite the process of compiling comments received.
To put this in more concrete terms, Google Forms automatically flows the answers through to a spreadsheet, where each submitter gets their own row, and each question gets its own column. Voila, each each cell contains a single party’s answer to a single question. This saves untold hours of cutting and pasting. The spreadsheet also tabulates the answers to multiple choice questions.
Think of the spreadsheet as the “admin view” of the Google Form. That is really where the magic happens.
There may be ways to move answers in bulk from Word docs, spreadsheets or possibly even fillable PDFs. At a minimum this requires some care and precision in setting up the individual input document, so that a bulk transfer of data can be made to the master spreadsheet. Meanwhile Google Form just runs.
I would love to find viable FOSS equivalents to Google Docs and Google Forms, but so far I haven’t. If one exists at all, and is workable, only then do we look at whether its privacy, confidentiality, data protection, etc., elements are superior to Google (one assumes they would be, but that’s up to the developer community). It would be a nice project for somebody. Maybe that auction money could support developing a platform for ICANN that does this stuff.
Greg
On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 10:12 AM Evin Erdogdu <evin.erdogdu@icann.org> wrote:
Dear All,
Further to the AI from today’s CPWG call, please see below feedback on EPDP form community questions.
Thanks to all for productive feedback regarding the form.
- *Community concern about the Google Form “harvesting all the information” submitted via the form.* It was noted ICANN org and community use forms already, but this would be first time for public comment process. The comments are also public, but the concern was Google retention of the data.
Any ALAC members concerned with Google’s retention of data may submit comments by filling out the word version of the form and sending it to At-Large Staff staff@atlarge.icann.org or policy-staff@icann.org.
- *Alternatives to the form.* It was noted that for some in the world (i.e. in China), Google products are not available. Is there an official alternative submission method? One could use a Word Doc or PDF of the form. In general, the community wanted to know rationale for using Google forms for the whole process, as opposed to a fillable PDF, or Word doc template for comments?
To facilitate offline work, or for those who may not have access to the form, you may download an offline version of the form here: https://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/epdp-gtld-registration-data-specs-public-co.... Please submit completed forms to At-Large Staff staff@atlarge.icann.org or policy-staff@icann.org.
EPDP Leadership chose to utilize Google Forms because Google automatically sorts and organizes answers to questions, which will expedite the process of compiling comments received.
For more information, anyone interested may refer to the EPDP Leadership webinar <https://community.icann.org/display/EOTSFGRD/2018-11-29+EPDP+Initial+Report+...>, during which the rationale for and explanation of the Google Form is described.
- *Public visibility of draft mode. *It was noted you may save progress on the Google Form, then submit later, but that the saved work was public. This was seen as undesirable by many in the community. Is there a way to not have the draft/saved form public; only have the final submission public?
Commenters have the option of using the word version to work offline and then can complete the Google form when finished. We are not aware of a way to save progress privately on Google Forms.
- *Concerns with mistakes in the form submission process*. The suggested alternative to the above was working from a Word doc, then copying + pasting over. The concern was the potential for mistakes. If mistakes are made on the submission, as is currently done, would it be possible to remove or revise the submission to public comment?
Yes. Commenters are able to edit their previous submission by following prompts in the email they will receive from Google. If the commenter would like to delete a submission, please notify policy-staff@icann.org, and EPDP Staff Support can assist.
Kind Regards,
Evin
_______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ GTLD-WG mailing list GTLD-WG@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gtld-wg
Working Group direct URL: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/New+GTLDs
_______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
_______________________________________________ CPWG mailing listCPWG@icann.orghttps://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
_______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
Hello all, On 19/12/2018 17:20, Greg Shatan wrote:
EPDP Leadership chose to utilize Google Forms because Google automatically sorts and organizes answers to questions, which will expedite the process of compiling comments received.
To put this in more concrete terms, Google Forms automatically flows the answers through to a spreadsheet, where each submitter gets their own row, and each question gets its own column. Voila, each each cell contains a single party’s answer to a single question. This saves untold hours of cutting and pasting. The spreadsheet also tabulates the answers to multiple choice questions.
My point is that for ICANN communities that submit a Statement on behalf of a constituency and therefore not a personal comment, this is a false economy, as the cut/paste work now either needs to be done by At-Large Staff, or by unpaid volunteers. Pushing the work to the edges, is an unfair way to save money at the core. Kindest regards, Olivier
I guess I'm not sure why privacy is important here. Just do the work in a public living document Jonathan Zuck Executive Director Innovators Network Foundation www.Innovatorsnetwork.org<http://www.Innovatorsnetwork.org> ________________________________ From: GTLD-WG <gtld-wg-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org> on behalf of Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> Sent: Saturday, December 22, 2018 11:51:10 AM To: Greg Shatan; Evin Erdogdu Cc: cpwg@icann.org Subject: Re: [GTLD-WG] [CPWG] Feedback on EPDP Form Community Questions Hello all, On 19/12/2018 17:20, Greg Shatan wrote: EPDP Leadership chose to utilize Google Forms because Google automatically sorts and organizes answers to questions, which will expedite the process of compiling comments received. To put this in more concrete terms, Google Forms automatically flows the answers through to a spreadsheet, where each submitter gets their own row, and each question gets its own column. Voila, each each cell contains a single party’s answer to a single question. This saves untold hours of cutting and pasting. The spreadsheet also tabulates the answers to multiple choice questions. My point is that for ICANN communities that submit a Statement on behalf of a constituency and therefore not a personal comment, this is a false economy, as the cut/paste work now either needs to be done by At-Large Staff, or by unpaid volunteers. Pushing the work to the edges, is an unfair way to save money at the core. Kindest regards, Olivier
I had a strange problem. I submitted an elaborate comment, which is recorded in the spreadsheet, but while editing found multiple error messages and the edited version can't be saved. Sivasubramanian M On Sat, Dec 22, 2018, 10:32 PM Jonathan Zuck <JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org wrote:
I guess I'm not sure why privacy is important here. Just do the work in a public living document
Jonathan Zuck Executive Director Innovators Network Foundation www.Innovatorsnetwork.org
------------------------------ *From:* GTLD-WG <gtld-wg-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org> on behalf of Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> *Sent:* Saturday, December 22, 2018 11:51:10 AM *To:* Greg Shatan; Evin Erdogdu *Cc:* cpwg@icann.org *Subject:* Re: [GTLD-WG] [CPWG] Feedback on EPDP Form Community Questions
Hello all,
On 19/12/2018 17:20, Greg Shatan wrote:
EPDP Leadership chose to utilize Google Forms because Google automatically sorts and organizes answers to questions, which will expedite the process of compiling comments received.
To put this in more concrete terms, Google Forms automatically flows the answers through to a spreadsheet, where each submitter gets their own row, and each question gets its own column. Voila, each each cell contains a single party’s answer to a single question. This saves untold hours of cutting and pasting. The spreadsheet also tabulates the answers to multiple choice questions.
My point is that for ICANN communities that submit a Statement on behalf of a constituency and therefore not a personal comment, this is a false economy, as the cut/paste work now either needs to be done by At-Large Staff, or by unpaid volunteers. Pushing the work to the edges, is an unfair way to save money at the core. Kindest regards,
Olivier _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ registration-issues-wg mailing list registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg
At 22/12/2018 11:51 AM, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond wrote: Hello all, On 19/12/2018 17:20, Greg Shatan wrote: EPDP Leadership chose to utilize Google Forms because Google automatically sorts and organizes answers to questions, which will expedite the process of compiling comments received. To put this in more concrete terms, Google Forms automatically flows the answers through to a spreadsheet, where each submitter gets their own row, and each question gets its own column. Voila, each each cell contains a single party’s answer to a single question. This saves untold hours of cutting and pasting. The spreadsheet also tabulates the answers to multiple choice questions. My point is that for ICANN communities that submit a Statement on behalf of a constituency and therefore not a personal comment, this is a false economy, as the cut/paste work now either needs to be done by At-Large Staff, or by unpaid volunteers. Pushing the work to the edges, is an unfair way to save money at the core. Kindest regards, Olivier It is not only a "convenience" but will make the resultant table available far quicker. Contributing to this was not allowing free-form input but rather only the structured replies. On the processing issue, there is a third option. The GNSO staff who made the decision (perhaps in conjunction with EPDP leadership) can accept the WORD document and they do the cut/paste. And that is what is happening! Alan
Dar Evin, Dear Friends and Colleagues: Thankyou, Noted. However, this does not really address the issue. I am not concerned about Google having access to ‘my' personal comments and posting (which I understand I could protect from Google’s prying eyes by using the Word or .pdf forms.) The issue is that Goggle would have precocious and privileged access to (most of) the ensemble of community comments. Google is one of a a few major platforms which are interested parties. (a) how can one protect the independence of ICANN’s decisions if one of the major interested parties has prior knowledge of the community’s debates and (b) if Google can have that information only by virtue of offering a ’google forms’ service; what is to prevent the information being shared with Google’s competitors?
Google … automatically sorts and organises answers to questions…
… which tacitly confirms that significant political and administrative power over EPDP is being transferred to a non-neutral platform. Regards CW
On 19 Dec 2018, at 16:12, Evin Erdogdu <evin.erdogdu@icann.org> wrote:
Dear All,
Further to the AI from today’s CPWG call, please see below feedback on EPDP form community questions.
Thanks to all for productive feedback regarding the form.
Community concern about the Google Form “harvesting all the information” submitted via the form. It was noted ICANN org and community use forms already, but this would be first time for public comment process. The comments are also public, but the concern was Google retention of the data.
Any ALAC members concerned with Google’s retention of data may submit comments by filling out the word version of the form and sending it to At-Large Staffstaff@atlarge.icann.org <mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> or policy-staff@icann.org <mailto:policy-staff@icann.org>.
Alternatives to the form. It was noted that for some in the world (i.e. in China), Google products are not available. Is there an official alternative submission method? One could use a Word Doc or PDF of the form. In general, the community wanted to know rationale for using Google forms for the whole process, as opposed to a fillable PDF, or Word doc template for comments?
To facilitate offline work, or for those who may not have access to the form, you may download an offline version of the form here: https://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/epdp-gtld-registration-data-specs-public-co... <https://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/epdp-gtld-registration-data-specs-public-co...>. Please submit completed forms to At-Large Staff staff@atlarge.icann.org <mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> or policy-staff@icann.org <mailto:policy-staff@icann.org>.
EPDP Leadership chose to utilize Google Forms because Google automatically sorts and organizes answers to questions, which will expedite the process of compiling comments received.
For more information, anyone interested may refer to the EPDP Leadership webinar <https://community.icann.org/display/EOTSFGRD/2018-11-29+EPDP+Initial+Report+...>, during which the rationale for and explanation of the Google Form is described.
Public visibility of draft mode. It was noted you may save progress on the Google Form, then submit later, but that the saved work was public. This was seen as undesirable by many in the community. Is there a way to not have the draft/saved form public; only have the final submission public?
Commenters have the option of using the word version to work offline and then can complete the Google form when finished. We are not aware of a way to save progress privately on Google Forms.
Concerns with mistakes in the form submission process. The suggested alternative to the above was working from a Word doc, then copying + pasting over. The concern was the potential for mistakes. If mistakes are made on the submission, as is currently done, would it be possible to remove or revise the submission to public comment?
Yes. Commenters are able to edit their previous submission by following prompts in the email they will receive from Google. If the commenter would like to delete a submission, please notify policy-staff@icann.org <mailto:policy-staff@icann.org>, and EPDP Staff Support can assist.
Kind Regards, Evin
_______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org <mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg> _______________________________________________ registration-issues-wg mailing list registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org <mailto:registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg>
+1 Christopher On 19.12.2018, at 17:49, cw@christopherwilkinson.eu<mailto:cw@christopherwilkinson.eu> wrote: Dar Evin, Dear Friends and Colleagues: Thankyou, Noted. However, this does not really address the issue. I am not concerned about Google having access to ‘my' personal comments and posting (which I understand I could protect from Google’s prying eyes by using the Word or .pdf forms.) The issue is that Goggle would have precocious and privileged access to (most of) the ensemble of community comments. Google is one of a a few major platforms which are interested parties. (a) how can one protect the independence of ICANN’s decisions if one of the major interested parties has prior knowledge of the community’s debates and (b) if Google can have that information only by virtue of offering a ’google forms’ service; what is to prevent the information being shared with Google’s competitors?
Google … automatically sorts and organises answers to questions…
… which tacitly confirms that significant political and administrative power over EPDP is being transferred to a non-neutral platform. Regards CW On 19 Dec 2018, at 16:12, Evin Erdogdu <evin.erdogdu@icann.org<mailto:evin.erdogdu@icann.org>> wrote: Dear All, Further to the AI from today’s CPWG call, please see below feedback on EPDP form community questions. Thanks to all for productive feedback regarding the form. * Community concern about the Google Form “harvesting all the information” submitted via the form. It was noted ICANN org and community use forms already, but this would be first time for public comment process. The comments are also public, but the concern was Google retention of the data. Any ALAC members concerned with Google’s retention of data may submit comments by filling out the word version of the form and sending it to At-Large Staffstaff@atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> or policy-staff@icann.org<mailto:policy-staff@icann.org>. * Alternatives to the form. It was noted that for some in the world (i.e. in China), Google products are not available. Is there an official alternative submission method? One could use a Word Doc or PDF of the form. In general, the community wanted to know rationale for using Google forms for the whole process, as opposed to a fillable PDF, or Word doc template for comments? To facilitate offline work, or for those who may not have access to the form, you may download an offline version of the form here: https://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/epdp-gtld-registration-data-specs-public-co.... Please submit completed forms to At-Large Staff staff@atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> or policy-staff@icann.org<mailto:policy-staff@icann.org>. EPDP Leadership chose to utilize Google Forms because Google automatically sorts and organizes answers to questions, which will expedite the process of compiling comments received. For more information, anyone interested may refer to the EPDP Leadership webinar<https://community.icann.org/display/EOTSFGRD/2018-11-29+EPDP+Initial+Report+...>, during which the rationale for and explanation of the Google Form is described. * Public visibility of draft mode. It was noted you may save progress on the Google Form, then submit later, but that the saved work was public. This was seen as undesirable by many in the community. Is there a way to not have the draft/saved form public; only have the final submission public? Commenters have the option of using the word version to work offline and then can complete the Google form when finished. We are not aware of a way to save progress privately on Google Forms. * Concerns with mistakes in the form submission process. The suggested alternative to the above was working from a Word doc, then copying + pasting over. The concern was the potential for mistakes. If mistakes are made on the submission, as is currently done, would it be possible to remove or revise the submission to public comment? Yes. Commenters are able to edit their previous submission by following prompts in the email they will receive from Google. If the commenter would like to delete a submission, please notify policy-staff@icann.org<mailto:policy-staff@icann.org>, and EPDP Staff Support can assist. Kind Regards, Evin _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ registration-issues-wg mailing list registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org<mailto:registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ registration-issues-wg mailing list registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg
I must confess I don't find this compelling. Our wiki is not private. If Google wanted they could be scraping that. Jonathan Zuck Executive Director Innovators Network Foundation www.Innovatorsnetwork.org<http://www.Innovatorsnetwork.org> ________________________________ From: GTLD-WG <gtld-wg-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org> on behalf of Roberto Gaetano <roberto_gaetano@hotmail.com> Sent: Saturday, December 22, 2018 2:37:13 PM To: Christopher Wilkinson Cc: cpwg@icann.org Subject: Re: [GTLD-WG] [CPWG] [registration-issues-wg] Feedback on EPDP Form Community Questions +1 Christopher On 19.12.2018, at 17:49, cw@christopherwilkinson.eu<mailto:cw@christopherwilkinson.eu> wrote: Dar Evin, Dear Friends and Colleagues: Thankyou, Noted. However, this does not really address the issue. I am not concerned about Google having access to ‘my' personal comments and posting (which I understand I could protect from Google’s prying eyes by using the Word or .pdf forms.) The issue is that Goggle would have precocious and privileged access to (most of) the ensemble of community comments. Google is one of a a few major platforms which are interested parties. (a) how can one protect the independence of ICANN’s decisions if one of the major interested parties has prior knowledge of the community’s debates and (b) if Google can have that information only by virtue of offering a ’google forms’ service; what is to prevent the information being shared with Google’s competitors?
Google … automatically sorts and organises answers to questions…
… which tacitly confirms that significant political and administrative power over EPDP is being transferred to a non-neutral platform. Regards CW On 19 Dec 2018, at 16:12, Evin Erdogdu <evin.erdogdu@icann.org<mailto:evin.erdogdu@icann.org>> wrote: Dear All, Further to the AI from today’s CPWG call, please see below feedback on EPDP form community questions. Thanks to all for productive feedback regarding the form. * Community concern about the Google Form “harvesting all the information” submitted via the form. It was noted ICANN org and community use forms already, but this would be first time for public comment process. The comments are also public, but the concern was Google retention of the data. Any ALAC members concerned with Google’s retention of data may submit comments by filling out the word version of the form and sending it to At-Large Staffstaff@atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> or policy-staff@icann.org<mailto:policy-staff@icann.org>. * Alternatives to the form. It was noted that for some in the world (i.e. in China), Google products are not available. Is there an official alternative submission method? One could use a Word Doc or PDF of the form. In general, the community wanted to know rationale for using Google forms for the whole process, as opposed to a fillable PDF, or Word doc template for comments? To facilitate offline work, or for those who may not have access to the form, you may download an offline version of the form here: https://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/epdp-gtld-registration-data-specs-public-co.... Please submit completed forms to At-Large Staff staff@atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> or policy-staff@icann.org<mailto:policy-staff@icann.org>. EPDP Leadership chose to utilize Google Forms because Google automatically sorts and organizes answers to questions, which will expedite the process of compiling comments received. For more information, anyone interested may refer to the EPDP Leadership webinar<https://community.icann.org/display/EOTSFGRD/2018-11-29+EPDP+Initial+Report+...>, during which the rationale for and explanation of the Google Form is described. * Public visibility of draft mode. It was noted you may save progress on the Google Form, then submit later, but that the saved work was public. This was seen as undesirable by many in the community. Is there a way to not have the draft/saved form public; only have the final submission public? Commenters have the option of using the word version to work offline and then can complete the Google form when finished. We are not aware of a way to save progress privately on Google Forms. * Concerns with mistakes in the form submission process. The suggested alternative to the above was working from a Word doc, then copying + pasting over. The concern was the potential for mistakes. If mistakes are made on the submission, as is currently done, would it be possible to remove or revise the submission to public comment? Yes. Commenters are able to edit their previous submission by following prompts in the email they will receive from Google. If the commenter would like to delete a submission, please notify policy-staff@icann.org<mailto:policy-staff@icann.org>, and EPDP Staff Support can assist. Kind Regards, Evin _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ registration-issues-wg mailing list registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org<mailto:registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ registration-issues-wg mailing list registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg
Jonathan: We are addressing, on the one hand, - profound scepticism as to the activities of the major platforms since the Facebook-Cambridge Analytica scandal. And on the other hand - a general awareness of the power of Big Data Algorithms, without being able to comprehend or control them when applied to our public data.. Thus, (a) I agree with you that there is nothing to stop all and sundry - including the major platforms - taking down all available public data and processing it as they wish (and they might learn a thing or two in the process), and (b) in this case, one of the major platforms has been given, by ICANN, precocious and privileged access to our data, in the format of their choosing. Which - to say the least - is potentially anti-competitive vis-á vis their competitors, large and small. And vis-à-vis the rest of us, potentially compromises the neutrality and independence of the multi-stakeholder, consensus building process.to which, by our lights we each apply rather a lot of our voluntary time, experience and expertise. I suggest that ICANN should think again. Google Docs is not a neutral and independent Application, such as Open-Office or Adobe among others. It appears to be an integral part of a major platform with interests.across the Internet, including the DNS. CW
On 23 Dec 2018, at 00:34, Jonathan Zuck <JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org> wrote:
I must confess I don't find this compelling. Our wiki is not private. If Google wanted they could be scraping that.
Jonathan Zuck Executive Director Innovators Network Foundation www.Innovatorsnetwork.org <http://www.innovatorsnetwork.org/> From: GTLD-WG <gtld-wg-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org> on behalf of Roberto Gaetano <roberto_gaetano@hotmail.com> Sent: Saturday, December 22, 2018 2:37:13 PM To: Christopher Wilkinson Cc: cpwg@icann.org Subject: Re: [GTLD-WG] [CPWG] [registration-issues-wg] Feedback on EPDP Form Community Questions
+1 Christopher
On 19.12.2018, at 17:49, cw@christopherwilkinson.eu <mailto:cw@christopherwilkinson.eu> wrote:
Dar Evin, Dear Friends and Colleagues:
Thankyou, Noted. However, this does not really address the issue.
I am not concerned about Google having access to ‘my' personal comments and posting (which I understand I could protect from Google’s prying eyes by using the Word or .pdf forms.)
The issue is that Goggle would have precocious and privileged access to (most of) the ensemble of community comments.
Google is one of a a few major platforms which are interested parties. (a) how can one protect the independence of ICANN’s decisions if one of the major interested parties has prior knowledge of the community’s debates and (b) if Google can have that information only by virtue of offering a ’google forms’ service; what is to prevent the information being shared with Google’s competitors?
Google … automatically sorts and organises answers to questions…
… which tacitly confirms that significant political and administrative power over EPDP is being transferred to a non-neutral platform.
Regards
CW
On 19 Dec 2018, at 16:12, Evin Erdogdu <evin.erdogdu@icann.org <mailto:evin.erdogdu@icann.org>> wrote:
Dear All,
Further to the AI from today’s CPWG call, please see below feedback on EPDP form community questions.
Thanks to all for productive feedback regarding the form.
Community concern about the Google Form “harvesting all the information” submitted via the form. It was noted ICANN org and community use forms already, but this would be first time for public comment process. The comments are also public, but the concern was Google retention of the data.
Any ALAC members concerned with Google’s retention of data may submit comments by filling out the word version of the form and sending it to At-Large Staffstaff@atlarge.icann.org <mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> or policy-staff@icann.org <mailto:policy-staff@icann.org>.
Alternatives to the form. It was noted that for some in the world (i.e. in China), Google products are not available. Is there an official alternative submission method? One could use a Word Doc or PDF of the form. In general, the community wanted to know rationale for using Google forms for the whole process, as opposed to a fillable PDF, or Word doc template for comments?
To facilitate offline work, or for those who may not have access to the form, you may download an offline version of the form here: https://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/epdp-gtld-registration-data-specs-public-co... <https://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/epdp-gtld-registration-data-specs-public-co...>. Please submit completed forms to At-Large Staff staff@atlarge.icann.org <mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> or policy-staff@icann.org <mailto:policy-staff@icann.org>.
EPDP Leadership chose to utilize Google Forms because Google automatically sorts and organizes answers to questions, which will expedite the process of compiling comments received.
For more information, anyone interested may refer to the EPDP Leadership webinar <https://community.icann.org/display/EOTSFGRD/2018-11-29+EPDP+Initial+Report+...>, during which the rationale for and explanation of the Google Form is described.
Public visibility of draft mode. It was noted you may save progress on the Google Form, then submit later, but that the saved work was public. This was seen as undesirable by many in the community. Is there a way to not have the draft/saved form public; only have the final submission public?
Commenters have the option of using the word version to work offline and then can complete the Google form when finished. We are not aware of a way to save progress privately on Google Forms.
Concerns with mistakes in the form submission process. The suggested alternative to the above was working from a Word doc, then copying + pasting over. The concern was the potential for mistakes. If mistakes are made on the submission, as is currently done, would it be possible to remove or revise the submission to public comment?
Yes. Commenters are able to edit their previous submission by following prompts in the email they will receive from Google. If the commenter would like to delete a submission, please notify policy-staff@icann.org <mailto:policy-staff@icann.org>, and EPDP Staff Support can assist.
Kind Regards, Evin
_______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org <mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg> _______________________________________________ registration-issues-wg mailing list registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org <mailto:registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg>
_______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org <mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ registration-issues-wg mailing list registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg
Again, I’m having trouble seeing how this compromises the integrity or neutrality of the process. That’s what seems to be a bridge too far. I’m not trying to be dismissive but to seriously understand the context in which making public an already public process (both wiki and email). Is google going to detect who makes which comments and start making us see ads to subtly persuade us to make another choice on DNS policy? I’ll admit my bias is toward a structured solution that generates some stats that WE can use. But we’re talking about making all such data available via an open data platform eventually so I fail to see how a choice of vendor would spoil the milk. Open to being convinced however. J From: "cw@christopherwilkinson.eu" <cw@christopherwilkinson.eu> Date: Sunday, December 23, 2018 at 11:31 AM To: Jonathan Zuck <JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org> Cc: Roberto Gaetano <roberto_gaetano@hotmail.com>, "cpwg@icann.org" <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [GTLD-WG] [CPWG] [registration-issues-wg] Feedback on EPDP Form Community Questions Jonathan: We are addressing, on the one hand, - profound scepticism as to the activities of the major platforms since the Facebook-Cambridge Analytica scandal. And on the other hand - a general awareness of the power of Big Data Algorithms, without being able to comprehend or control them when applied to our public data.. Thus, (a) I agree with you that there is nothing to stop all and sundry - including the major platforms - taking down all available public data and processing it as they wish (and they might learn a thing or two in the process), and (b) in this case, one of the major platforms has been given, by ICANN, precocious and privileged access to our data, in the format of their choosing. Which - to say the least - is potentially anti-competitive vis-á vis their competitors, large and small. And vis-à-vis the rest of us, potentially compromises the neutrality and independence of the multi-stakeholder, consensus building process.to which, by our lights we each apply rather a lot of our voluntary time, experience and expertise. I suggest that ICANN should think again. Google Docs is not a neutral and independent Application, such as Open-Office or Adobe among others. It appears to be an integral part of a major platform with interests.across the Internet, including the DNS. CW On 23 Dec 2018, at 00:34, Jonathan Zuck <JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org<mailto:JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org>> wrote: I must confess I don't find this compelling. Our wiki is not private. If Google wanted they could be scraping that. Jonathan Zuck Executive Director Innovators Network Foundation www.Innovatorsnetwork.org<http://www.innovatorsnetwork.org/> ________________________________ From: GTLD-WG <gtld-wg-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org>> on behalf of Roberto Gaetano <roberto_gaetano@hotmail.com<mailto:roberto_gaetano@hotmail.com>> Sent: Saturday, December 22, 2018 2:37:13 PM To: Christopher Wilkinson Cc: cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [GTLD-WG] [CPWG] [registration-issues-wg] Feedback on EPDP Form Community Questions +1 Christopher On 19.12.2018, at 17:49, cw@christopherwilkinson.eu<mailto:cw@christopherwilkinson.eu> wrote: Dar Evin, Dear Friends and Colleagues: Thankyou, Noted. However, this does not really address the issue. I am not concerned about Google having access to ‘my' personal comments and posting (which I understand I could protect from Google’s prying eyes by using the Word or .pdf forms.) The issue is that Goggle would have precocious and privileged access to (most of) the ensemble of community comments. Google is one of a a few major platforms which are interested parties. (a) how can one protect the independence of ICANN’s decisions if one of the major interested parties has prior knowledge of the community’s debates and (b) if Google can have that information only by virtue of offering a ’google forms’ service; what is to prevent the information being shared with Google’s competitors?
Google … automatically sorts and organises answers to questions…
… which tacitly confirms that significant political and administrative power over EPDP is being transferred to a non-neutral platform. Regards CW On 19 Dec 2018, at 16:12, Evin Erdogdu <evin.erdogdu@icann.org<mailto:evin.erdogdu@icann.org>> wrote: Dear All, Further to the AI from today’s CPWG call, please see below feedback on EPDP form community questions. Thanks to all for productive feedback regarding the form. * Community concern about the Google Form “harvesting all the information” submitted via the form. It was noted ICANN org and community use forms already, but this would be first time for public comment process. The comments are also public, but the concern was Google retention of the data. Any ALAC members concerned with Google’s retention of data may submit comments by filling out the word version of the form and sending it to At-Large Staffstaff@atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> or policy-staff@icann.org<mailto:policy-staff@icann.org>. * Alternatives to the form. It was noted that for some in the world (i.e. in China), Google products are not available. Is there an official alternative submission method? One could use a Word Doc or PDF of the form. In general, the community wanted to know rationale for using Google forms for the whole process, as opposed to a fillable PDF, or Word doc template for comments? To facilitate offline work, or for those who may not have access to the form, you may download an offline version of the form here: https://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/epdp-gtld-registration-data-specs-public-co.... Please submit completed forms to At-Large Staff staff@atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> or policy-staff@icann.org<mailto:policy-staff@icann.org>. EPDP Leadership chose to utilize Google Forms because Google automatically sorts and organizes answers to questions, which will expedite the process of compiling comments received. For more information, anyone interested may refer to the EPDP Leadership webinar<https://community.icann.org/display/EOTSFGRD/2018-11-29+EPDP+Initial+Report+...>, during which the rationale for and explanation of the Google Form is described. * Public visibility of draft mode. It was noted you may save progress on the Google Form, then submit later, but that the saved work was public. This was seen as undesirable by many in the community. Is there a way to not have the draft/saved form public; only have the final submission public? Commenters have the option of using the word version to work offline and then can complete the Google form when finished. We are not aware of a way to save progress privately on Google Forms. * Concerns with mistakes in the form submission process. The suggested alternative to the above was working from a Word doc, then copying + pasting over. The concern was the potential for mistakes. If mistakes are made on the submission, as is currently done, would it be possible to remove or revise the submission to public comment? Yes. Commenters are able to edit their previous submission by following prompts in the email they will receive from Google. If the commenter would like to delete a submission, please notify policy-staff@icann.org<mailto:policy-staff@icann.org>, and EPDP Staff Support can assist. Kind Regards, Evin _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ registration-issues-wg mailing list registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org<mailto:registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ registration-issues-wg mailing list registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org<mailto:registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg
I think this is a red herring! There are at times things that I will not put on a GoogleDoc, but this is so far from them. If you want an (unrelated) privacy concern, see https://gizmodo.com/the-amazon-alexa-eavesdropping-nightmare-came-true-18312... . I am not particularly concerned with the inadvertent leak of the information to the wrong person. I an far more interested in why Amazon is recording and keeping that 100MB of records! Alan At 23/12/2018 05:33 PM, Jonathan Zuck wrote: Again, I’m having trouble seeing how this compromises the integrity or neutrality of the process. That’s what seems to be a bridge too far. I’m not trying to be dismissive but to seriously understand the context in which making public an already public process (both wiki and email). Is google going to detect who makes which comments and start making us see ads to subtly persuade us to make another choice on DNS policy? I’ll admit my bias is toward a structured solution that generates some stats that WE can use. But we’re talking about making all such data available via an open data platform eventually so I fail to see how a choice of vendor would spoil the milk. Open to being convinced however. J From: "cw@christopherwilkinson.eu" <cw@christopherwilkinson.eu> Date: Sunday, December 23, 2018 at 11:31 AM To: Jonathan Zuck <JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org> Cc: Roberto Gaetano <roberto_gaetano@hotmail.com>, "cpwg@icann.org" <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [GTLD-WG] [CPWG] [registration-issues-wg] Feedback on EPDP Form Community Questions Jonathan: We are addressing, on the one hand, - profound scepticism as to the activities of the major platforms since the Facebook-Cambridge Analytica scandal. And on the other hand - a general awareness of the power of Big Data Algorithms, without being able to comprehend or control them when applied to our public data.. Thus, (a) I agree with you that there is nothing to stop all and sundry - including the major platforms - taking down all available public data and processing it as they wish (and they might learn a thing or two in the process), and (b) in this case, one of the major platforms has been given, by ICANN, precocious and privileged access to our data, in the format of their choosing. Which - to say the least - is potentially anti-competitive vis-á vis their competitors, large and small. And vis-� -vis the rest of us, potentially compromises the neutrality and independence of the multi-stakeholder, consensus building process.to which, by our lights we each apply rather a lot of our voluntary time, experience and expertise. I suggest that ICANN should think again. Google Docs is not a neutral and independent Application, such as Open-Office or Adobe among others. It appears to be an integral part of a major platform with interests.across the Internet, including the DNS. CW On 23 Dec 2018, at 00:34, Jonathan Zuck < JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org<mailto:JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org>> wrote: I must confess I don't find this compelling. Our wiki is not private. If Google wanted they could be scraping that. Jonathan Zuck Executive Director Innovators Network Foundation www.Innovatorsnetwork.org<http://www.innovatorsnetwork.org/> ________________________________ From: GTLD-WG < gtld-wg-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org>> on behalf of Roberto Gaetano < roberto_gaetano@hotmail.com<mailto:roberto_gaetano@hotmail.com>> Sent: Saturday, December 22, 2018 2:37:13 PM To: Christopher Wilkinson Cc: cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [GTLD-WG] [CPWG] [registration-issues-wg] Feedback on EPDP Form Community Questions +1 Christopher On 19.12.2018, at 17:49, cw@christopherwilkinson.eu<mailto:cw@christopherwilkinson.eu> wrote: Dar Evin, Dear Friends and Colleagues: Thankyou, Noted. However, this does not really address the issue. I am not concerned about Google having access to ‘my' personal comments and posting (which I understand I could protect from Google’s prying eyes by using the Word or .pdf forms.) The issue is that Goggle would have precocious and privileged access to (most of) the ensemble of community comments. Google is one of a a few major platforms which are interested parties. (a) how can one protect the independence of ICANN’s decisions if one of the major interested parties has prior knowledge of the community’s debates and (b) if Google can have that information only by virtue of offering a ’google forms’ service; what is to prevent the information being shared with Google’s competitors?
Google � automatically soorts and organises answers to questions�
� which taacitly confirms that significant political and administrative power over EPDP is being transferred to a non-neutral platform. Regards CW On 19 Dec 2018, at 16:12, Evin Erdogdu <evin.erdogdu@icann.org<mailto:evin.erdogdu@icann.org> > wrote: Dear All, Further to the AI from today’s CPWG call, please see below feedback on EPDP form community questions. Thanks to all for productive feedback regarding the form. Community concern about the Google Form “harvesting all the information” submitted via the form. It was noted ICANN org and community use forms already, but this would be first time for public comment process. The comments are also public, but the concern was Google retention of the data. Any ALAC members concerned with Google’s retention of data may submit comments by filling out the word version of the form and sending it to At-Large Staffstaff<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> @atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> or policy-staff@icann.org<mailto:policy-staff@icann.org>. Alternatives to the form. It was noted that for some in the world (i.e. in China), Google products are not available. Is there an official alternative submission method? One could use a Word Doc or PDF of the form. In general, the community wanted to know rationale for using Google forms for the whole process, as opposed to a fillable PDF, or Word doc template for comments? To facilitate offline work, or for those who may not have access to the form, you may download an offline version of the form here: https://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/epdp-gtld-registration-data-specs-public-co... . Please submit completed forms to At-Large Staff staff@atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> or policy-staff@icann.org<mailto:policy-staff@icann.org>. EPDP Leadership chose to utilize Google Forms because Google automatically sorts and organizes answers to questions, which will expedite the process of compiling comments received. For more information, anyone interested may refer to the EPDP Leadership webinar<https://community.icann.org/display/EOTSFGRD/2018-11-29+EPDP+Initial+Report+...>, during which the rationale for and explanation of the Google Form is described. Public visibility of draft mode. It was noted you may save progress on the Google Form, then submit later, but that the saved work was public. This was seen as undesirable by many in the community. Is there a way to not have the draft/saved form public; only have the final submission public? Commenters have the option of using the word version to work offline and then can complete the Google form when finished. We are not aware of a way to save progress privately on Google Forms. Concerns with mistakes in the form submission process. The suggested alternative to the above was working from a Word doc, then copying + pasting over. The concern was the potential for mistakes. If mistakes are made on the submission, as is currently done, would it be possible to remove or revise the submission to public comment? Yes. Commenters are able to edit their previous submission by following prompts in the email they will receive from Google. If the commenter would like to delete a submission, please notify policy-staff@icann.org<mailto:policy-staff@icann.org>, and EPDP Staff Support can assist. Kind Regards, Evin _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ registration-issues-wg mailing list registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org<mailto:registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ registration-issues-wg mailing list registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org<mailto:registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ registration-issues-wg mailing list registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg
Exactly Jonathan Zuck Executive Director Innovators Network Foundation www.Innovatorsnetwork.org<http://www.Innovatorsnetwork.org> ________________________________ From: Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> Sent: Sunday, December 23, 2018 7:26:57 PM To: Jonathan Zuck; cw@christopherwilkinson.eu Cc: cpwg@icann.org Subject: Re: [registration-issues-wg] [CPWG] [GTLD-WG] Feedback on EPDP Form Community Questions I think this is a red herring! There are at times things that I will not put on a GoogleDoc, but this is so far from them. If you want an (unrelated) privacy concern, see https://gizmodo.com/the-amazon-alexa-eavesdropping-nightmare-came-true-18312... . I am not particularly concerned with the inadvertent leak of the information to the wrong person. I an far more interested in why Amazon is recording and keeping that 100MB of records! Alan At 23/12/2018 05:33 PM, Jonathan Zuck wrote: Again, I’m having trouble seeing how this compromises the integrity or neutrality of the process. That’s what seems to be a bridge too far. I’m not trying to be dismissive but to seriously understand the context in which making public an already public process (both wiki and email). Is google going to detect who makes which comments and start making us see ads to subtly persuade us to make another choice on DNS policy? I’ll admit my bias is toward a structured solution that generates some stats that WE can use. But we’re talking about making all such data available via an open data platform eventually so I fail to see how a choice of vendor would spoil the milk. Open to being convinced however. J From: "cw@christopherwilkinson.eu" <cw@christopherwilkinson.eu> Date: Sunday, December 23, 2018 at 11:31 AM To: Jonathan Zuck <JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org> Cc: Roberto Gaetano <roberto_gaetano@hotmail.com>, "cpwg@icann.org" <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [GTLD-WG] [CPWG] [registration-issues-wg] Feedback on EPDP Form Community Questions Jonathan: We are addressing, on the one hand, - profound scepticism as to the activities of the major platforms since the Facebook-Cambridge Analytica scandal. And on the other hand - a general awareness of the power of Big Data Algorithms, without being able to comprehend or control them when applied to our public data.. Thus, (a) I agree with you that there is nothing to stop all and sundry - including the major platforms - taking down all available public data and processing it as they wish (and they might learn a thing or two in the process), and (b) in this case, one of the major platforms has been given, by ICANN, precocious and privileged access to our data, in the format of their choosing. Which - to say the least - is potentially anti-competitive vis-á vis their competitors, large and small. And vis-� -vis the rest of us, potentially compromises the neutrality and independence of the multi-stakeholder, consensus building process.to which, by our lights we each apply rather a lot of our voluntary time, experience and expertise. I suggest that ICANN should think again. Google Docs is not a neutral and independent Application, such as Open-Office or Adobe among others. It appears to be an integral part of a major platform with interests.across the Internet, including the DNS. CW On 23 Dec 2018, at 00:34, Jonathan Zuck < JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org<mailto:JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org>> wrote: I must confess I don't find this compelling. Our wiki is not private. If Google wanted they could be scraping that. Jonathan Zuck Executive Director Innovators Network Foundation www.Innovatorsnetwork.org<http://www.innovatorsnetwork.org/> ________________________________ From: GTLD-WG < gtld-wg-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org>> on behalf of Roberto Gaetano < roberto_gaetano@hotmail.com<mailto:roberto_gaetano@hotmail.com>> Sent: Saturday, December 22, 2018 2:37:13 PM To: Christopher Wilkinson Cc: cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [GTLD-WG] [CPWG] [registration-issues-wg] Feedback on EPDP Form Community Questions +1 Christopher On 19.12.2018, at 17:49, cw@christopherwilkinson.eu<mailto:cw@christopherwilkinson.eu> wrote: Dar Evin, Dear Friends and Colleagues: Thankyou, Noted. However, this does not really address the issue. I am not concerned about Google having access to ‘my' personal comments and posting (which I understand I could protect from Google’s prying eyes by using the Word or .pdf forms.) The issue is that Goggle would have precocious and privileged access to (most of) the ensemble of community comments. Google is one of a a few major platforms which are interested parties. (a) how can one protect the independence of ICANN’s decisions if one of the major interested parties has prior knowledge of the community’s debates and (b) if Google can have that information only by virtue of offering a ’google forms’ service; what is to prevent the information being shared with Google’s competitors?
Google � automatically soorts and organises answers to questions�
� which taacitly confirms that significant political and administrative power over EPDP is being transferred to a non-neutral platform. Regards CW On 19 Dec 2018, at 16:12, Evin Erdogdu <evin.erdogdu@icann.org<mailto:evin.erdogdu@icann.org> > wrote: Dear All, Further to the AI from today’s CPWG call, please see below feedback on EPDP form community questions. Thanks to all for productive feedback regarding the form. Community concern about the Google Form “harvesting all the information” submitted via the form. It was noted ICANN org and community use forms already, but this would be first time for public comment process. The comments are also public, but the concern was Google retention of the data. Any ALAC members concerned with Google’s retention of data may submit comments by filling out the word version of the form and sending it to At-Large Staffstaff<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> @atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> or policy-staff@icann.org<mailto:policy-staff@icann.org>. Alternatives to the form. It was noted that for some in the world (i.e. in China), Google products are not available. Is there an official alternative submission method? One could use a Word Doc or PDF of the form. In general, the community wanted to know rationale for using Google forms for the whole process, as opposed to a fillable PDF, or Word doc template for comments? To facilitate offline work, or for those who may not have access to the form, you may download an offline version of the form here: https://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/epdp-gtld-registration-data-specs-public-co... . Please submit completed forms to At-Large Staff staff@atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> or policy-staff@icann.org<mailto:policy-staff@icann.org>. EPDP Leadership chose to utilize Google Forms because Google automatically sorts and organizes answers to questions, which will expedite the process of compiling comments received. For more information, anyone interested may refer to the EPDP Leadership webinar<https://community.icann.org/display/EOTSFGRD/2018-11-29+EPDP+Initial+Report+...>, during which the rationale for and explanation of the Google Form is described. Public visibility of draft mode. It was noted you may save progress on the Google Form, then submit later, but that the saved work was public. This was seen as undesirable by many in the community. Is there a way to not have the draft/saved form public; only have the final submission public? Commenters have the option of using the word version to work offline and then can complete the Google form when finished. We are not aware of a way to save progress privately on Google Forms. Concerns with mistakes in the form submission process. The suggested alternative to the above was working from a Word doc, then copying + pasting over. The concern was the potential for mistakes. If mistakes are made on the submission, as is currently done, would it be possible to remove or revise the submission to public comment? Yes. Commenters are able to edit their previous submission by following prompts in the email they will receive from Google. If the commenter would like to delete a submission, please notify policy-staff@icann.org<mailto:policy-staff@icann.org>, and EPDP Staff Support can assist. Kind Regards, Evin _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ registration-issues-wg mailing list registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org<mailto:registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ registration-issues-wg mailing list registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org<mailto:registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ registration-issues-wg mailing list registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg
participants (11)
-
Alan Greenberg -
cw＠christopherwilkinson.eu -
Evin Erdogdu -
Greg Shatan -
Jonathan Zuck -
Judith Hellerstein -
Justine Chew -
Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond -
Roberto Gaetano -
Satish Babu -
sivasubramanian muthusamy