Phil, You said:

Option 1 for Recommendation 5 received support from 11 WG members and opposition from 3; those opposed constituted 21.5% of all members expressing a view.

Option 4 for Recommendation 5 received support from 10 members and opposition from 3; those opposed constituted 23% of all members expressing a view. That is just shy of one-quarter of all responses. I am not at all sure I can agree with you about what is significant vs insignificant.

The significance of the opposition is more properly measured in context of those in support and not merely in the context of the total number of participants expressing an opinion. Further, just simply looking at opposition as an aggregate group leads to further inappropriate conclusions. An opposition of 4 cannot be expressed as ³significant" if each of the 4 had differing reasons for opposition or opted to support alternative options within Recommendation #5. It would be even less ³significant² if 2 were completely opposed to the entire Recommendation (regardless of option) and the other 2 were merely opposed to Option 1 but favored a different Option to the same recommendation number 5. Thus, more appropriate viewing would be: Option 1: In Favor: 11 (79%) Opposed: 3 (21%)

...

Explanatory note (example only): Several members in opposition expressed support for competing options for Recommendation Number 5. One member was completely opposed to Recommendation Number 5 regardless of option.

Option 4: In Favor: 10 (77%) Opposed: 3 (23%)

...

Explanatory note (example only): Several members in opposition expressed support for competing options for Recommendation Number 5. One member was completely opposed to Recommendation Number 5 regardless of option.

My 2 cents. Paul From: Gnso-igo-ingo-crp <gnso-igo-ingo-crp-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of "Corwin, Philip via Gnso-igo-ingo-crp" <gnso-igo-ingo-crp@icann.org> Reply-To: "Corwin, Philip" <pcorwin@verisign.com> Date: Tuesday, June 12, 2018 at 10:49 PM To: "rlevy@tucows.com" <rlevy@tucows.com> Cc: "gnso-igo-ingo-crp@icann.org" <gnso-igo-ingo-crp@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-igo-ingo-crp] FW: Proposed Revision of Consensus Levels

Thanks Reg.

My 2 cents is that the difference between 25%, 23%, and 21.5% is too insignificant to result in a different categorization, and that ŒStrong support but significant opposition¹ is the proper designation.

Best, Philip

Philip S. Corwin Policy Counsel VeriSign, Inc. 12061 Bluemont Way Reston, VA 20190 703-948-4648/Direct 571-342-7489/Cell

"Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey

From: Reg Levy [mailto:rlevy@tucows.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2018 4:32 PM To: Corwin, Philip <pcorwin@verisign.com> Cc: gnso-igo-ingo-crp@icann.org Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [Gnso-igo-ingo-crp] FW: Proposed Revision of Consensus Levels

As you say, there's no brightline. I would have expected 25% to be "significant" and anything less "a small minority". I get your argument that "important" and "noteworthy" are synonyms but if only one person objected with what they felt were important or noteworthy arguments, I don't agree that this would mean there was "significant" opposition.

My 2¢

-- Reg Levy

Director of Compliance

Tucows

D: +1 (323) 880-0831

O: +1 (416) 535-0123 x1452

UTC -7

...

On 12 Jun 2018, at 12:54, Corwin, Philip via Gnso-igo-ingo-crp <gnso-igo-ingo-crp@icann.org> wrote:

Resending as I apparently used an incorrect email address

From: Corwin, Philip Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2018 2:54 PM To: 'Gnso-igo-ingo-crp' <gnso-igo-ingo-crp-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-igo-ingo-crp-bounces@icann.org> > Subject: Proposed Revision of Consensus Levels

Following up on the statement I made during our WG call earlier today, I believe that the initial designations of support for Options 1 and 4 are incorrect and that they should be changed from ³Consensus² to ³Strong support but significant opposition².

Section 3.6 (Standard Methodology for Making Decisions) of the GNSO WG Guidelines (https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/annex-1-gn so-wg-guidelines-30jan18-en.pdf <https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/annex-1-gn so-wg-guidelines-30jan18-en.pdf> ) describes those designations as follows:

Consensus - a position where only a small minority disagrees, but most agree.

Strong support but significant opposition - a position where, while most of the group supports a recommendation, there are a significant number of those who do not support it. (Emphasis added)

So the relevant question is whether the opposition to Options 1 and 4 constitutes a ³small minority² or ³a significant number².

Option 1 for Recommendation 5 received support from 11 WG members and opposition from 3; those opposed constituted 21.5% of all members expressing a view.

Option 4 for Recommendation 5 received support from 10 members and opposition from 3; those opposed constituted 23% of all members expressing a view. That is just shy of one-quarter of all responses.

There is no bright line test in the Guidelines for discerning the dividing line between a small minority and a significant number, and reviews of dictionary definitions of ³significant² are not of much value in this context. While there can be no doubt that results above 20% are statistically significant, the most common definitions of the term are ³important² or noteworthy². My personal view is that a ³small minority² would be 10% or less, but that when more than a fifth and nearly one-quarter of those expressing a view are in opposition to a given position it should be regarded as a ³significant number². The fact that just three members are in opposition cannot be used alone to designate them as a ³small minority² given the very small size of the total group expressing a view ­ if the responses were multiplied by 10 there would be 110 in favor of Option 1 and 30 opposed, and 100 on favor of Option 4 and 30 opposed, and in both instances the opposition should be viewed as significant.

If the Chair does not alter the initial designations I will include this statement in my Minority Report.

Philip S. Corwin

Policy Counsel

VeriSign, Inc.

12061 Bluemont Way Reston, VA 20190

703-948-4648/Direct

571-342-7489/Cell

"Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey

_______________________________________________ Gnso-igo-ingo-crp mailing list Gnso-igo-ingo-crp@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-igo-ingo-crp@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-igo-ingo-crp <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-igo-ingo-crp>

_______________________________________________ Gnso-igo-ingo-crp mailing list Gnso-igo-ingo-crp@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-igo-ingo-crp