Thanks Ayden and Stephanie for putting the language theme on the rug.

I am a recent member, my native language is Spanish, I can read your mails
but I help a lot with translator, from there to be able to participate
fluently there is a big gap.

I think that there are other people in the same situation that we can
contribute to the exchange but it's very difficult for us to do that if we
can communicate.

How Malcom X said:
"Sitting at the table doesn't make you a diner. You must be eating some of
what's on that plate..." In the same way, being here in the mail list don't
make us active participants of the debate.

It is a good idea to put these issues to the discussion, for an open
community.

In orden to the discussion that follows in the e-mail; the confidence in
the data collection tools is fundamental for every researcher. In that
case, the name request may also be due to the need to control one response
per person, there are other alternatives such as e-mail and in that case
you could also contact the person who responded, if necessary.

On the other hand, who should handle the database is the one who performs
the survey and the guarantees of privacy should be given by this figure.
In Uruguay, for example, there is legislation that obliges researchers to
protect this right and under this law surveys are conducted.

Sorry for the length of the text.

Greetings.

2017-04-20 11:08 GMT-03:00 Sam Lanfranco <[log in to unmask]>:

> Whether or not surveys remain anonymous depends on the context. Sometimes
> they are and sometimes they are not.
> The ICANN rds-pdp-wg has surveys, discussed this issue in detail, and
> within its context decided that its surveys would not be anonymous.
> I personally was in favor of anonymous at the start of that discussion
> (having administered lots of surveys).
> In the end I agreed with non-anonymous in that context. Context is
> important.
>
> Sam L.
>
> On 4/20/2017 9:56 AM, Joan Kerr wrote:
>
> Thanks Farzi.
>
> It's important that surveys remain anonymous and the focus is on the
> response and critical input not the collection of personal data.
> Cheers,
> Joan
>
> On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 9:24 AM, farzaneh badii <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
>
>> I will relay this to the WS2 ombuds group.
>>
>> Best
>>
>> Farzaneh
>>
>> Farzaneh
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 9:17 AM, Joan Kerr <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Dorothy,
>>>
>>> I was so surprise that the personal questions were there too.  Even at
>>> the completion, they asked for your information if you want the review.
>>>
>>> Joan
>>>
>>> On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 3:29 PM, dorothy g <[log in to unmask]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Interesting,  I clicked open the survey and it asks for personal
>>>> information which it says will not be given to ICANN. Why do I need to give
>>>> my personal information to this third party?
>>>>
>>>> best
>>>>
>>> <rest deleted>
>



-- 
Prof. Ma. Julia Morales
Investigadora en el ObservaTIC
Docente - UDELAR