I’ve added a few comments in the GoogleDoc.  Mostly agreeing with Kristine, plus a couple of additional suggestions.

On the pricing – would it work to suggest they give an average price range?   This would address the tester’s concern that prices vary, although perhaps the responses then are really not useful?

Susan Payne
Head of Legal Policy | Valideus Ltd

E: susan.payne@valideus.com
D: +44 20 7421 8255
T: +44 20 7421 8299
M: +44 7971 661175

From: Gnso-rpm-data [mailto:gnso-rpm-data-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Dorrain, Kristine via Gnso-rpm-data
Sent: 28 August 2018 00:41
To: Ariel Liang <ariel.liang@icann.org>; gnso-rpm-data@icann.org
Subject: Re: [Gnso-rpm-data] [Ext] RE: REMINDER: Registry Survey - Beta Testers' Feedback (Review by COB Monday)

OK, I’ve gone through and made my comments.  I have proposed new text so I hope others will go in as well and check out my suggestions.

I don’t want to beat a dead horse, but some people on this list felt strongly that we needed to get some “average” pricing for TLDs.  The problem, as Maxim points out, is that this is a massively error-prone question.  For instance, a new gTLD operator who has 20 TLD and ran 3 registration phases and 6 pricing tiers has 360 prices to try to average.  I am not sure what we’re getting from this question.  I don’t want to mention it because I’ve been working hard to not re-litigate points I lost on, but I honestly don’t know how else to ask a pricing question.  Thoughts from members who think it’s still an important question?

Thanks,

Kristine

From: Ariel Liang [mailto:ariel.liang@icann.org]
Sent: Monday, August 27, 2018 3:44 PM
To: Dorrain, Kristine <dorraink@amazon.com>; gnso-rpm-data@icann.org
Subject: Re: [Ext] RE: REMINDER: Registry Survey - Beta Testers' Feedback (Review by COB Monday)

Thank you very much Kristine! We appreciate your time and review!

Best Regards,

Mary, Julie, Ariel & Berry

From: "Dorrain, Kristine" <dorraink@amazon.com>
Date: Monday, August 27, 2018 at 6:38 PM
To: Ariel Liang <ariel.liang@icann.org>, "gnso-rpm-data@icann.org" <gnso-rpm-data@icann.org>
Subject: [Ext] RE: REMINDER: Registry Survey - Beta Testers' Feedback (Review by COB Monday)

Hi all, I hadn’t checked this list after noon on Friday so I didn’t see this. I’ll look at it next.  Apologies for the delay.

Best,

Kristine

From: Gnso-rpm-data [mailto:gnso-rpm-data-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Ariel Liang
Sent: Monday, August 27, 2018 3:14 PM
To: gnso-rpm-data@icann.org
Subject: [Gnso-rpm-data] REMINDER: Registry Survey - Beta Testers' Feedback (Review by COB Monday)

Dear Kristine and all,

Staff have not heard any feedback from the Sub Team in respect to beta testers’ input for the Registry survey.

Since many of testers’ comments are substantive and about the questions themselves, we hesitate to move forward without the direction from the Sub Team.

As noted below, you may provide your comments in response to the testers’ feedback directly on the Google Doc. Please only focus on the comments in GREEN on page 1-10. Screenshots of the questions are also included in the Google Doc.

Thank you,

Mary, Julie, Ariel & Berry

From: Ariel Liang <ariel.liang@icann.org>
Date: Friday, August 24, 2018 at 6:30 PM
To: "gnso-rpm-data@icann.org" <gnso-rpm-data@icann.org>
Subject: Registry Survey - Beta Testers' Feedback (Review by COB Monday)

Dear Data Sub Team members (and Kristine in particular),

Beta testers have reviewed the registry surveys. Test link: http://icannregistryoperators.cloudssi.com/login.html [icannregistryoperators.cloudssi.com]

Since the beta testers’ feedback is quite extensive, and some comments are substantive, staff are sharing the Google Doc used by the beta testers for you to review their comments directly: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_Ik_0_DD359Q8ewqkamqCi5i1t-M-k652SUYkczbr6E/edit?usp=sharing [docs.google.com]

Please note:

• The bullet points in GREEN need Data Sub Team’s review/input. Please put your comment/input as new bullet points directly into the Google Doc (everyone can access via the “suggesting” mode).
• The bullet points highlighted in yellow are mostly technical issues, and they have been forwarded to AG directly to review.
• This survey has been programmed to use cookies to allow survey takers to return to their answers. While Lori suggested AG directing respondents in removing the survey cookie due to privacy concerns, AG did not implement it as the directions will differ depending on the respondent's computer/internet browser set-up and may be a bit technical. However, AG could add a note at the beginning and/or end of the survey with a link to a website that explains how to delete all cookies. In that implementation, AG would explain that deleting all cookies would remove their ability to re-visit their survey answers and also could sign them out of other websites that have sent them cookies. Please let us know if you have any opinion about adding that note to the survey introduction and/or to the survey exit pages.
• Due to the design of the survey and the platform used, a tester (including staff) is unable to see ALL questions due to the choices made in certain questions. Hence, the feedback is not all comprehensive. Staff are checking with AG and see whether there is a need to re-do the testing, or the feedback received now is sufficient.
• David McAuley, one of the beta testers, may include feedback in the Google Doc by tomorrow (Saturday). Staff don’t expect further comments from other beta testers.

By COB Monday, 27 August, please be so kind to write in the Google Doc your input to beta testers’ feedback. Analysis Group will implement the changes accordingly.

Thank you for your time and help!

Best Regards,

Mary, Julie, Ariel, and Berry