We need to be careful about this statistic: "41 Responses is less than the (currently) 133 listed participants ". A large percentage of the public comments were from groups all of which had multiple participants in the CWG. Chuck -----Original Message----- From: cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Jaap Akkerhuis Sent: Thursday, May 28, 2015 4:58 AM To: cwg-stewardship@icann.org Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Support for PTI and PTI board composition in the public comments (Milton) FAVOR: 31 OPPOSE: 10 Not explicitly addressed: 6 (Kieren)
One key element from that: the actual numbers (rather than general sense > and who) are not very useful because the sample is too small - the level of > response is not there to draw conclusions beyond areas of agreement or > disagreement.
Yes, it is hard to quantify the reactions. An other observation is that 41 Responses is less then the (currently) 133 listed participants. jaap _______________________________________________ CWG-Stewardship mailing list CWG-Stewardship@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship