Suggested questionnaire for "promotes consumer trust"
Dear all Following my previous message, I attach my suggestions on how to convert the content of section 2 of the Subteam's paper into a questionnaire. You'll see that I have put plenty of comments to ask for your views and/or clarification. I hope this is helpful in assisting us to meet our deadline of Wednesday 24 February for our call for public comment. Best wishes Emily 76 Temple Road, Oxford OX4 2EZ UK telephone: 01865 582 811 mobile: 07540 049 322 emily.taylor@etlaw.co.uk www.etlaw.co.uk
Hi All, Tx for all the work on the proposed questionnaire. Is this going out as part of our public comment period, as well as by additional distribution paths (e.g., our individual networks, websites, etc?)? I think there may be a updated version but, with apologies, I could not find it. So let me share the following thoughts on the attached version: 1. Emily's edits and questions make sense to me. 2. I think we should clarify that this involves gTLD data and gTLD registrations (as ccTLDs may differ) 3. Could we define all acronyms? E.g., ICT in question 18. (Acronyms and their meanings differ around the world). 4. I think we should identify ourselves, the source of the survey, how it will be used, where to provide the answers, deadlines, etc, on the form. 5. Do we want responders to identify themselves, or at least some general category from which they hail? If so, I know we have our own privacy/data protection issues to wrestle with. Perhaps some general categories if full identification is not requested (e.g., registrant... ). Really interesting work, and I truly look forward to seeing the results. Tx Consumer Trust Subteam!! Kathy From: rt4-whois-bounces@icann.org [mailto:rt4-whois-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Emily Taylor Sent: Saturday, February 19, 2011 7:47 AM To: Dr.Sarmad Hussain; Olivier ITEANU; lynn@goodsecurityconsulting.com; Peter Nettlefold; Bill Smith Cc: rt4-whois@icann.org WHOIS Subject: [Rt4-whois] Suggested questionnaire for "promotes consumer trust" Dear all Following my previous message, I attach my suggestions on how to convert the content of section 2 of the Subteam's paper into a questionnaire. You'll see that I have put plenty of comments to ask for your views and/or clarification. I hope this is helpful in assisting us to meet our deadline of Wednesday 24 February for our call for public comment. Best wishes Emily
Hi Kathy Thanks - good points. I saw this as going out as part of the public comment, and see no reason why we should not also distribute proactively through our networks. Agree with all of Kathy's other suggestions. Best, Emily On 20 Feb 2011, at 13:54, Kathy Kleiman wrote:
Hi All, Tx for all the work on the proposed questionnaire. Is this going out as part of our public comment period, as well as by additional distribution paths (e.g., our individual networks, websites, etc?)?
I think there may be a updated version but, with apologies, I could not find it. So let me share the following thoughts on the attached version: 1. Emily’s edits and questions make sense to me. 2. I think we should clarify that this involves gTLD data and gTLD registrations (as ccTLDs may differ) 3. Could we define all acronyms? E.g., ICT in question 18. (Acronyms and their meanings differ around the world). 4. I think we should identify ourselves, the source of the survey, how it will be used, where to provide the answers, deadlines, etc, on the form. 5. Do we want responders to identify themselves, or at least some general category from which they hail? If so, I know we have our own privacy/data protection issues to wrestle with. Perhaps some general categories if full identification is not requested (e.g., registrant… ).
Really interesting work, and I truly look forward to seeing the results. Tx Consumer Trust Subteam!! Kathy
From: rt4-whois-bounces@icann.org [mailto:rt4-whois-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Emily Taylor Sent: Saturday, February 19, 2011 7:47 AM To: Dr.Sarmad Hussain; Olivier ITEANU; lynn@goodsecurityconsulting.com; Peter Nettlefold; Bill Smith Cc: rt4-whois@icann.org WHOIS Subject: [Rt4-whois] Suggested questionnaire for "promotes consumer trust"
Dear all
Following my previous message, I attach my suggestions on how to convert the content of section 2 of the Subteam's paper into a questionnaire. You'll see that I have put plenty of comments to ask for your views and/or clarification.
I hope this is helpful in assisting us to meet our deadline of Wednesday 24 February for our call for public comment.
Best wishes
Emily <Consumer trust questions.docx>
76 Temple Road, Oxford OX4 2EZ UK telephone: 01865 582 811 mobile: 07540 049 322 emily.taylor@etlaw.co.uk www.etlaw.co.uk
I feel strongly that we should not collect PII. Too many issues with that. On Feb 20, 2011, at 5:59 AM, Emily Taylor wrote: Hi Kathy Thanks - good points. I saw this as going out as part of the public comment, and see no reason why we should not also distribute proactively through our networks. Agree with all of Kathy's other suggestions. Best, Emily On 20 Feb 2011, at 13:54, Kathy Kleiman wrote: Hi All, Tx for all the work on the proposed questionnaire. Is this going out as part of our public comment period, as well as by additional distribution paths (e.g., our individual networks, websites, etc?)? I think there may be a updated version but, with apologies, I could not find it. So let me share the following thoughts on the attached version: 1. Emily’s edits and questions make sense to me. 2. I think we should clarify that this involves gTLD data and gTLD registrations (as ccTLDs may differ) 3. Could we define all acronyms? E.g., ICT in question 18. (Acronyms and their meanings differ around the world). 4. I think we should identify ourselves, the source of the survey, how it will be used, where to provide the answers, deadlines, etc, on the form. 5. Do we want responders to identify themselves, or at least some general category from which they hail? If so, I know we have our own privacy/data protection issues to wrestle with. Perhaps some general categories if full identification is not requested (e.g., registrant… ). Really interesting work, and I truly look forward to seeing the results. Tx Consumer Trust Subteam!! Kathy From: rt4-whois-bounces@icann.org<mailto:rt4-whois-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:rt4-whois-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Emily Taylor Sent: Saturday, February 19, 2011 7:47 AM To: Dr.Sarmad Hussain; Olivier ITEANU; lynn@goodsecurityconsulting.com<mailto:lynn@goodsecurityconsulting.com>; Peter Nettlefold; Bill Smith Cc: rt4-whois@icann.org<mailto:rt4-whois@icann.org> WHOIS Subject: [Rt4-whois] Suggested questionnaire for "promotes consumer trust" Dear all Following my previous message, I attach my suggestions on how to convert the content of section 2 of the Subteam's paper into a questionnaire. You'll see that I have put plenty of comments to ask for your views and/or clarification. I hope this is helpful in assisting us to meet our deadline of Wednesday 24 February for our call for public comment. Best wishes Emily <Consumer trust questions.docx> [http://www.etlaw.co.uk/images/stories/etlaw/logo310.gif] 76 Temple Road, Oxford OX4 2EZ UK telephone: 01865 582 811 mobile: 07540 049 322 emily.taylor@etlaw.co.uk<mailto:emily.taylor@etlaw.co.uk> www.etlaw.co.uk<http://www.etlaw.co.uk/>
participants (3)
-
Emily Taylor -
Kathy Kleiman -
Smith, Bill