RE: [nc-udrp] UDRP Review - Draft Questionnaire

["Chicoine, Caroline G." <CCHICOINE@thompsoncoburn.com>]

Great!  We are lucky to have such active volunteers on this Task Force.

-----Original Message-----
From: Erick Iriarte [mailto:faia@amauta.rcp.net.pe]
Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2001 8:43 AM
To: Chicoine, Caroline G.
Subject: RE: [nc-udrp] UDRP Review - Draft Questionnaire


Hi!
I translate to spanish.

Erick


At 02:27 p.m. 10/2/2001 -0500, you wrote:
>Fantastic!
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Dan Steinberg [mailto:synthesis@videotron.ca]
>Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2001 1:59 PM
>To: Milton Mueller
>Cc: CCHICOINE@thompsoncoburn.com; DNSO.Secretariat@dnso.org;
>nc-udrp@dnso.org
>Subject: Re: [nc-udrp] UDRP Review - Draft Questionnaire
>
>
>I am qualified to translate the questionnaire into French, if no one else
>volunteers.
>
>Milton Mueller wrote:
>
> > Caroline:
> > I think you have hit many of the right issues with the draft, however,
> > I have a question about its format.
> >
> > The format is structured as a questionnaire, which seems to
> > presume that someone is going to "count" the results. This
> > will require a lot of work.  Also, as a self-selected population, the
> > resulting statistics could not be considered a representative sample of
> > a population. Especially given language differences.
> >
> > Would it not be simpler to just have a bullet list of relevant
> > issues and ask commenters to address them in an open-ended
> > way?
> >
> > BTW, once we have an acceptable questionnaire, are any of the
> > non-English members of the Task Force willing to take responsibility
> > for translating it?
> >
> > >>> "Chicoine, Caroline G." <CCHICOINE@thompsoncoburn.com> 10/02/01
>09:55AM >>>
> > I have no problem and agree with your reasoning for changing the "front
>end"
> > of the timeline so it does not appear that it took us so long to create
>the
> > questionnaire.  Elisabeth, please change the first deadline to October
1,
> > 2001 - November 1, 2001.
> >
> > The reasons there is overlap in having the questionnaire submitted to
the
> > public and our review of the responses is that (1) we can start
reviewing
> > responses as they come in, and (2) at the same time we should be
reviewing
> > the outside studies mentioned in the Terms of Reference.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Dan Steinberg [mailto:synthesis@videotron.ca]
> > Sent: Monday, October 01, 2001 6:24 PM
> > To: Chicoine, Caroline G.
> > Cc: 'nc-udrp@dnso.org'; 'DNSO.Secretariat@dnso.org'
> > Subject: Re: [nc-udrp] UDRP Review - Draft Questionnaire
> >
> > Ummmmmmm, can someone explain the dates to me?
> > If we just got started and only recently got this committee fully
staffed,
> > what
> > on earht is the point of having the June 20-August 14th deadline for
> > creating
> > the questionnaire?  Why not have a timeline that reflects reality and
> > provides
> > useful imformation?  Someone is sure to wonder why it took so long to
>create
> > the
> > questionnaire.  Why not simply say  Oct 1-November xx?
> >
> > As for the rest of the timeline, Ive been a project magager many times
im
>my
> > career and I find it a bit confusing. I 'think' I can explain the
>overlaps,
> > but
> > without actually *knowing* why I have uncertainty. The timeline also
>appears
> > fairly ambitious, so everyone feel free to tell me to shut up and get
down
> > to
> > substantive work ok?
> >
> > "Chicoine, Caroline G." wrote:
> >
> > > Per my email on Friday, this email is to provide you with a revised
> > schedule
> > > (Elisabeth, can you just take these new dates from these email and
>modify
> > > Terms of Reference or do you want me to edit it and send you a revised
> > > version?)
> > >
> > > The June 29-August 14th deadline for creating the questionnaire should
>be
> > > changed to June 29-November 1, 2001.
> > >
> > > The August 15-September 15 deadline for submitting the questionnaire
to
> > the
> > > public forum comment should be changed to November 2-December 15.
> > >
> > > The August 15-October 31 deadline for the Task Force to review results
>of
> > > questionnaire and prepare report should be changed to November
1-January
> > 15
> > >
> > > The November 1-November 11 deadline for Names Council review should be
> > > changed to January 16-February 1.
> > >
> > > The November 12 deadline for NC to vote on report shall be changed to
be
> > > the first NC teleconference after Feb 1. (we should have firm date
soon)
> > >
> > > The November 13-December 13 deadline to schedule implementation should
>be
> > > changed to the one month period following the NC's vote.
> > >
> > > I am also forwarding a copy of a stab I took at a proposed
Questionnaire
> > as
> > > promised.  Is there anyone on the list that cannot open Word
>attachments?
> > > The questionnaire includes questions based on input the interim
>committee
> > > received to date.  This is just something to get us started.  I have
no
> > > presumptions that it is the right starting point or that any of it
will
> > end
> > > up in the final questionnaire so PLEASE do not start shooting the
> > messenger.
> > > As the terms of reference mention, there were several topics that we
as
> > the
> > > interim committee were made of aware of and we may want to structure
the
> > > questionnaire by subject matter for clarity.  I also think that there
>will
> > > be questions that we only want certain people to answer based on their
> > > actual experience with the UDRP (see proposed questions directed to
> > > complainant/respondent and panelist/provider).
> > >
> > > With respect to the earlier emails regarding "UDRPs" used outside the
> > ICANN
> > > process, can I recommend that the following people review the policies
>and
> > > identify the differences between them and ICANN's UDRP  (I have chosen
>the
> > > following people because they come from the countries or regions to
>which
> > > these "other" UDRP apply):
> > >
> > > Canada - Dr. Joelle Thibault
> > > United Kingdom (Nominet) - Katrina Burchell
> > > Japan - Joon Hyung Hong
> > > Chile - Erick Iriarte
> > >
> > > Can we have a report by next Monday?
> > >
> > > We should continue to do this for "other" UDRPs as we become aware of
> > them.
> > >
> > > Welcome to the group and Milton and I look forward to working with all
>of
> > > you over the next month to create the questionnaire.  We apologize for
>the
> > > delay. Again, please be mindful to keep your emails substantive and to
>the
> > > point as a courtesy to us all who I am certain revive numerous emails
>each
> > > day that we must wade through.
> > >
> > >  <<UDRP Review Questionnaire.DOC>>
> > >
> > >
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >                                     Name: UDRP Review
Questionnaire.DOC
> > >    UDRP Review Questionnaire.DOC    Type: WINWORD File
> > (application/msword)
> > >                                 Encoding: base64
> >
> > --
> > Dan Steinberg
> >
> > SYNTHESIS:Law & Technology
> > 35, du Ravin  phone: (613) 794-5356
> > Chelsea, Quebec  fax:   (819) 827-4398
> > J9B 1N1                 e-mail:synthesis@videotron.ca
>
>--
>Dan Steinberg
>
>SYNTHESIS:Law & Technology
>35, du Ravin  phone: (613) 794-5356
>Chelsea, Quebec  fax:   (819) 827-4398
>J9B 1N1                 e-mail:synthesis@videotron.ca