[council] FW: [SOAC-Leaders] Fwd: SOACs Feedback on the Draft Gender Diversity & Participation Survey by 20 May

[Michael Oghia]

Thank you Renata, and excellent additions.

Also, great points James. Were any of James' concerns addressed elsewhere?

-Michael

On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 5:40 PM, James Gannon <james at cyberinvasion.net>
wrote:

> Woah everyone, let's take a step back here, who is going to collate and
> manage the responses to this questionnaire?
>
> This questionnaire is collecting extremely confidential PII and is most
> certainly not anonymous and confidential as stated in the document.
>
> Is this going to be managed by a competent research firm or is this to be
> analysed by ICANN org or whom?
>
> I have serious concerns about this process from a pure process point of
> view and from a European legal point of view.
>
> -James
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: NCSG-Discuss [mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU] On Behalf Of
> Renata Aquino Ribeiro
> Sent: 05 May 2017 16:32
> To: NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
> Subject: Re: [council] FW: [SOAC-Leaders] Fwd: SOACs Feedback on the Draft
> Gender Diversity & Participation Survey by 20 May
>
> Hi
>
> Mike, agree w/ all your edits
>
> Ayden, indeed sexual orientation is missing but I wonder if this couldn't
> be a whole new other survey on LGBTQI in the community
>
> A few things I commented when the survey was in WS2 Div which had no
> support so did not make it to the final doc:
>
> - Young women - including the negative perception that young women would
> exceptionally deemed unfit for leadership positions or looked down
>
> - Regional perspective - Women from rural areas have to strive more to be
> included, same for developing countries
>
> - Blockage of leadership positions - it is possible that there are those
> who - not gender activists -  feel blocked at leadership positions due to
> gender or combined factors (gender+age, gender+region
> etc)
>
> - Race - another factor, which, if combined, could influence perceptions
>
> Again, this was all discussed but isn't on the doc. I think it should be
> but...
> Also there is a hope that cross-checking data - for instance - how
> different ages respond to each question - could provide some knowledge.
>
> I would rather see these combined factors phrased as stand-alone questions
> in themselves for clearer results.
>
> Cross-checking can work but one can also, as the saying goes, "torture
> data until it says what one wants"
>
> Best,
>
> Renata
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20170505/847f9d5f/attachment.htm>