RE: [dow1tf] FW: Revised Survey

["Neuman, Jeff" <Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Milton,  

Thanks for your comments. I know the format is poor for now, but it was
really for purposes of showing redlines and for looking at text.

Please see my responses in ALL CAPS below:

-----Original Message-----
From: Milton Mueller [mailto:Mueller@xxxxxxx]
Sent: Monday, January 19, 2004 5:12 PM
To: dow1tf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx
Cc: rosemann@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [dow1tf] FW: Revised Survey




First, some questions:

Do you think it is necessary to educate recipients of this survey
on the structure of ICANN? 

YES.  SINCE THIS SURVEY WILL BE OPEN FOR ALL TO ANSWER AS WELL AS THOSE THAT
MAY NOT BE ASW FAMILIAR WITH WHO THE GNSO IS, I BELIEVE SOME SORT OF
INTRODUCTION IS NECESSARY, BUT I WILL LEAVE THAT TO THE GROUP TO DECIDE.


If this came into your mailbox on
a busy day, would you read it or delete it? Is it necessary
for our respondents to know the difference between 
ICANN and the GNSO? 

ALTHOUGH THE GNSO IS A PART OF THE ICANN, OUR QUESTIONS ARE NOT NECESSARILY
ON BEHALF OF ICANN, BUT ONLY ON BEHALF OF THE TASK FORCE.  I BELIEVE A
DISTINCTION NEEDS TO BE MADE.


Do they need to know that to answer
the questions? Will knowing that make them more likely to 
answer them? 

If someone doesn't have any idea what Port 43 is,
will our explanation make them able to answer the survey?
If they do know what it is, will they be able to stop laughing 
long enough to answer it? 

I AM SURE THAT WAS YOUR POLITE WAY OF SAYING THE DEFINITION WAS TOO
SIMPLISTIC.  ANY OTHER SUGGESTIONS?

Should we explain what a "Whois 
proxy" is, too?

YES.  DO YOU HAVE A DEFINITION.

Comments:

Question 8 is poorly phrased. It should ask "what" other source
would they use, not "whether" they would be able to use
another source. There is no doubt that other sources are 
available. The question is what the effect will be. Options a) 
and b) make no sense unless the question is changed in the way 
I suggest. As it currently reads, the options should be "yes" or 
"no." But if we want real data, Q 8 cannot be a "yes/no" 
question, because it permits biased respondents to manipulate 
the data. Those who want to retain current modes of access 
have an incentive to tell us they have no alternative. We can 
avoid this by asking what other source they would use and finding 
out how expensive or inconvenient it is.

THIS MAKES SENSE

Question 9: I believe the word jhustify should be used.

WE WILL TAKE A POLL ON THE CALL TODAY ON THIS.