[nc-whois] [urgent] report update
[I'm copying this message to Alexander Svensson. Alexander, could
you please try to make sure that this message and the latest draft
make it to as many members of the task force as possible before the
NC session? Thanks.]
I just had a telephone discussion with Miriam Sapiro, in which we
went through the current state of the draft. The resulting changes
can be found in the redlined version of the text which is available
I'll walk you through the individual changes in this message. Page
numbers refer to the redlined PDF version. Also, I'll limit myself
to the more substantial changes. Minor corrections are left out.
- On page 4, Miriam was afraid that the task force may overstep its
mission by stating that it would "guide the development of policy
considerations". Half of the sentence was removed.
- On page 5, the "finding" language was adopted, and "opt-in or
more restrictive" was spelled out. Also, Miriam argued that the
sentence that the Task Force's findings support the preliminary
findings was redundant. Since I didn't come up with a better
wording, I agreed to remove that sentence, but added a cautionary
notice on behalf of myself.
- On page 7, "uniform" was replaced by "systematic".
- On page 8, the repetition of the number of governmental
participants was removed, since this is elaborated on in more
detail in the Statistical Considerations section.
- On page 9, a note was added stating that "17% of those who
answered the questionnaire did not register any domain names".
- On page 10, registrar/registry users were added, and it was
mentioned that a considerable fraction of respondents does not
heavily use WHOIS.
- On page 12, the numbers on governments and registrars/registries
were adjusted based on numbers provided by Miriam, and fetched
from the United Nations home page. Also, a short note on the
statistical implications was included.
- On page 14, chapter II was renamed: Instead of "Requirements",
it's now "Expectations". (Miriam didn't like "requirements", and
I didn't want to call the chapter just "User Experience", which
would have been wrong.)
- On page 21, a joint caveat was included, since there is really a
whole lot still to be done. (This is question 5, for which we
currently have unsufficient data.)
- On page 22, another such caveat was added, concerning question 6,
where privacy and technical aspects may be considered
underrepresented in the text.
- On page 24, there is a change from "each" to "this" which deserves
explanation: In the original text from Laurence, she states that
"Individual and ISP respondents were most likely to report very
low estimates (68% in each category chose "under 5%")". This
seems to be a simple editorial error on Laurence's side: With ISP
respondents, it's 58%. However, the 68% and 58% figures are
printed in a small font, and directly above each other. For this
reason, I had quietly dropped the ISP respondents when merging the
documents. I should have pointed this out earlier.
- On page 27, there's another joint caveat: When staring at the
numbers, one will notice that individual respondents are strongly
deviating from other categories when it comes to information such
as date of registration, or, most interesting, registrant
- On page 30, the order of mention of names was changed to put Karen
Elizaga first since (according to Miriam) she did most of the work
on this chapter.
- On page 42, a parenthesis is added which explains what's meant by
"opt-in or stricter protection".
- On page 45, the same parenthesis is removed.
- On page 45, there's a caveat from the gTLDs that they would like
to see it reflected that more than 1/3 of respondents in several
categories would welcome advertising material from their choosen
If there are any questions or urgent comments, please feel free to
contact me via e-mail or phone.
To those in Ghana: Alexander has my phone number and can give it to
you if you want to call me.
Thomas Roessler <firstname.lastname@example.org>
nc-whois document repository: <http://does-not-exist.org/whois/>