Hi folks, Responses inline: On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 6:58 AM, Mary Wong <mary.wong@icann.org> wrote:
Follow Up Questions from the Working Group Call with the Analysis Group:
1. On page 9 of the Revised Report, it says the median TMs registered in the TMCH was 1. Can we get more detail in buckets? (e.g. # that registered 2-5, 6-10, 11-50, 51-100, etc.) (George Kirikos)
We would be happy to provide this information, subject to a new/amended revised SOW with ICANN as this will entail some additional analysis.
In order to have calculated the median statistic, that means the Analysis Group had a dataset which consisted of a single column like: # of TMs recorded ------------------------- 1 3 5 6 1 3 1 1 etc. with every row representing a user of the TMCH. The amount of analysis to turn that into buckets simply involves *sorting* that data in ascending order, and then setting the breakpoints for the buckets! (i.e. taking a look at where the rows change from 1 to 2, 5 to 6, 10 to 11, etc.). The idea that there should be a "new/amended revised SOW" seems to me like an attempt to extract additional money from ICANN, and further delay the work of this PDP. In lieu of this ""new/amended revised SOW", why doesn't the Analysis Group simply export that raw data into either a CSV file or Excel file, and I can take the 3 minutes to sort it myself, and 5 minutes to scroll down and see where those breakpoints change?? Or, will providing the raw data itself require a "new/amended revised SOW"???
2. On page 9 of the Revised Report, the top 10 most popular strings (e.g. SMART, FOREX, HOTEL, etc) were listed. Can we get the top 500? (George Kirikos)
Yes, we can provide this information under the new/amended revised SOW as this will entail a small amount of additional work.
This answer is even sillier than #1. For #1, to calculate the median, the data was unsorted. In order to extract the top 10 most popular strings, this means they have a dataset like #1 in the form of STRING, Download Count, Trademark Holder ---------------------------------------------------------- smart 15,198, Smart Communications, Daimler AG forex 14,823 Forex Bank AB hotel 14,690 Hotel Top Level Domain GMBH etc. from page 9 of the report: https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/64066042/Analysis%20Group%2... with all the rows *already sorted*!! Their "work" to date involved simply taking this complete sorted list, and publishing just a subset, namely the *first 10* rows. This "small amount of additional work" involves taking the sorted results (which they already have), and copying/pasting the first 500 rows, instead of the first 10 rows. It's really that simple, folks! [I can see "work" being required to generate the 3rd column, if it was done manually, but that column isn't even that critical; the first 2 columns definitely exist already in a complete set, as there's no other way to extract the top 10 unless you've generated the entire sorted list first). In lieu of this ""new/amended revised SOW", why doesn't the Analysis Group simply export the full sorted data into either a CSV file or Excel file, and I can take the 10 seconds to copy/paste the first 500 rows (instead of the first 10 rows). Or, will providing the raw data itself require a "new/amended revised SOW"??? I'm sure it would take longer for The Analysis Group to provide excuses why they want a new/amended revised SOW for these 2 items than it would take to actually provide the raw data itself, which already exists and is trivial to transform into the requested results. Indeed, I'm amazed that the deliverables to ICANN didn't include the delivery of the raw data that supported the results (i.e. with a proper SOW, ICANN should already have this data). Sincerely, George Kirikos 416-588-0269 http://www.leap.com/