Hi Everyone (Small Team and Support Team): We are at a bit of an inflection point as we transition to interviews with the SubPro team. We thought it’d be a good idea to pause, see where we are, and decide if any changes are required. As you, I am anxious to move ahead and get done. With that in mind, I have attached three docs for our discussion as they might provide direction in how we conduct the next round of interviews. (I ask that you keep these docs confidential, from your co-workers and others in the ICANN community. I think making preliminary findings public will poison or influence the next round of interviews): 1. A n interview summary (Finding Notes), where I have grouped the feedback into a few, general headings. * This document is NOT intended for publication. Rather, it is a tool to create the next two docs that are intended for publication and also identify the attribution of the different findings that we make. * I created it by reviewing the posted interview notes (including the interviews with Board members but not including Susan’s SubPro interview) * Please review for completeness, Did I miss any interviews or important points? (You can use your memory for this review rather than digging out the docs. Our collective memories should suffice. As a complete review.) * Do the headings look ok? 2. A set of FINDINGS that is intended to inform the reader of our interview results and support our Recommendation * It is a slight reorganisation and rewording of the first document. * Please review the opening paragraph, it needs work. * Your review of the first doc should cover this one too. 3. A set of RECOMMENDATIONS based on the Findings. * They are Recommendation only, not with justification or defence — that is provided in the Findings. * The Recommendations are not grouped by headings, so it make the choice of grouping less important. * There were findings that did not result in Recommendations but I thought the audience should read thise Findings also as they are educational. * Do we have any others? Any with which you disagree? These last two docs would be chapters in our report, surrounding by sections on the purpose and methodology of the study, etc. After getting feedback on the docs, we will discuss changes to questions and methodology if any. Thanks everyone, Hang in there. Kurt