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

[James Gannon]

Thanks Ayden,
I’m very aware of those clauses, but I will not that they are not exemptions (I work with a large amount of clinical trial data in my day job as you can imagine). I will note that gender in combination with other identifiable data can take on the qualities and protections of PII/SPI when gathered as part of the same survey or data gathering exercise and stored in the same database.

For the purposes of what are we collecting this data, RTe4nata has said that it is not required for the WS2 diversity sub group to complete their work, so to what end are we collecting these data?

The very reason that I suggested an external firm is exactly as you mention below, the deidentification of data is an extremely complicated and skilled job, and not one that is to be taken lightly under any circumstances, and I will posit that likely no one on ICANN org staff is qualified to configure a survey platform to guarantee the protections we as NCSG should require for anything like this level of PII collection.

-James

From: Ayden Férdeline [mailto:icann at ferdeline.com]
Sent: 05 May 2017 19:01
To: James Gannon <james at cyberinvasion.net>
Cc: 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,

At least within Europe, there are well-defined exemptions for collecting and processing data for research and statistical purposes, at least where published results are de-identified.

Race and sexual orientation are considered sensitive personal data, but gender is not.

I agree that we should push for data minimisation and demand answers around who will have access to the full data set, ask what data elements are being collected which may not be immediately apparent (i.e. time stamps, IP addresses, browser data -- none of this should be collected), and how and where the data will be stored. But unless I am mistaken, and maybe I am, I do not see it as problematic to collect this data for statistical purposes if it is manifestly and voluntarily shared by the survey respondents.

What is more important, to me, than having an external research firm collect and process this data is having a platform which can be audited so that we can ensure the data being collected is only that data which should be collected. I think we can rule out SurveyMonkey and Google Forms, but Qualtrics if properly configured might be suitable.

Best wishes,
Ayden Férdeline
linkedin.com/in/ferdeline<http://www.linkedin.com/in/ferdeline>


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [council] FW: [SOAC-Leaders] Fwd: SOACs Feedback on the Draft Gender Diversity & Participation Survey by 20 May
Local Time: 5 May 2017 5:05 PM
UTC Time: 5 May 2017 16:05
From: james at CYBERINVASION.NET<mailto:james at CYBERINVASION.NET>
To: NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU<mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU>

My point is this will not be anonymous unless we are paying a research firm to conduct the survey for us.

And if ICANN org is planning on conducting this, how do they plan to be in accordance with the PII they are collecting, how are they doing to manage their legal obligations, how do they plan on soring the conformation in line with European law?

And back in the first place, why are we collecting this information at all, what defined purpose do we have for collection of such detailed personal information?

In my mind we cannot stand here as the group in ICANN who advocate for privacy and limitation of data collection within ICANN and support a survey of this kind.

-James

-----Original Message-----
From: Renata Aquino Ribeiro [mailto:raquino at gmail.com]
Sent: 05 May 2017 17:01
To: James Gannon <james at cyberinvasion.net<mailto:james at cyberinvasion.net>>
Cc: NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU<mailto: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

It says "Confidential-Draft"
That's all that this Confidential means - you're not supposed to answer the survey yet

Until 20 May SO/ACs can send their comments on the questions of the survey

From Stephanie's original message, members can send in comments on the list NCSG-DISCUSS and PC NCSG will submit a comment on the survey until 20 May
http://listserv.syr.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A2=ind1705&L=ncsg-discuss&F=&S=&X=FBDD34C6C12CF2F660&Y=raquino%40gmail.com&P=48908

That is not to say that you have good questions, there, James

This is a staff survey so I would think that the survey will be an anonymous form and the report drafted will be submitted for comment too

But yes, there may be those who won't trust enough to submit their answers or will wonder about where their responses are going to end up.

Would hiring an external consultant to do this address these concerns?
Would it be effective to create a "safe space" to answer this survey?

Personally, not sure on both answers.

At least the conversation is starting.

Best,

Renata


On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 12:40 PM, James Gannon <james at cyberinvasion.net<mailto: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<mailto: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/20170505/8c09541f/attachment.htm>