[Rigf_program] Revised evaluation system for APrIGF proposals

[Save Vocea]

And if there's space for another, I'd volunteer too.

Save Vocea ­ ICANN
I suppose we'd fit in <Tech and Academic>

Cheers,
Save

From:  Ji-Young Lee <leejy at kisa.or.kr>
Date:  Friday, June 14, 2013 3:04 PM
To:  "rigf_program at ap.rigf.asia" <rigf_program at ap.rigf.asia>
Subject:  Re: [Rigf_program] Revised evaluation system for APrIGF proposals

    
 

I'd like to join the selection committee as a local secretariat, KISA.

 

Among 4 stakeholder groups, I'm closest to the "governmental".

 

Ji-Young 
> ------------ 원본 메일 내용 ------------
> 보낸 사람 : "Paul Wilson"<pwilson at apnic.net>
> 받는 사람 : "<rigf_program at ap.rigf.asia>" <rigf_program at ap.rigf.asia>
> 메일 제목 : [Rigf_program] Revised evaluation system for APrIGF proposals
> 보낸 날짜 : Fri, 7 Jun 2013 17:00:29 +1000
>   
> 
> Dear all, 
> 
> I have revised the proposal evaluation system as follows, which I believe
> takes into account all comments made at the meeting today.
> 
> I hereby call for volunteers for the Selection Committee to please indicate
> your interest on the mailing list. The deadline for volunteers will be 23:59
> on 14 June 2013, UTC (or when 20 members have been selected, if that comes
> first). 
> 
> NOTE: Volunteers MUST indicate their stakeholder affiliation (section B) and
> cannot be considered without this.
> 
> Thanks, 
> 
> Paul. 
> ===== 
> 
> 
> APrIGF Proposal evaluation system
> ---------------------------------
> 
> Version: 1.0, June 2013
> 
> This document describes the mechanisms for evaluating session proposals (for
> workshops, plenaries or other sessions) submitted to the APrIGF, and for
> selecting successful proposals.
> 
> 
> A. Selection Committee
> ----------------------
> 
> A volunteer subcommittee (Selection Committee) of the M! SG will be assembled
> for the purpose of rating the proposals, as follows:
> 
> 1. After a call issued by the MSG chair, volunteers will submit their names
> and stakeholder affiliation (see below) to the MSG mailing list
> 
> 2. Names will be accepted in order of appearance on the list, providing that
> no single stakeholder grouping is represented by more than 40% or less than
> 10% of committee members.
> 
> 3. Up to 20 volunteers will be accepted by this means (less if the deadline
> passes before reaching this number)
> 
> 4. The selected members of the Selection Committee will be published on the
> MSG mailing list.
> 
> Committee members serve in their individual capacity to further the aims and
> success of the APrIGF, and not in a representative capacity for their
> stakeholder grouping or organisation.
> 
> 
> B. Stakeholder Groups
> ---------------------
> 
> The APrIGF recognises 4 stakeholder groups as follows:
> 
> 1. Civil Society 
> 2. Technical! and Academic
> 3. Business 
> 4. Governmental 
> 
> 
> C. Crite ria for Evaluation
> -----------------------
> 
> Proposals will be evaluated according to 3 criteria, interpreted according to
> the following guidance:
> 
> 1. Relevance 
> 
> Is the proposal relevant to the themes of this APrIGF meeting? Are the themes
> clearly stated and/or evident in the proposal? Are the specific issues to be
> addressed by the proposal also clear and relevant?
> 
> 2. Completeness 
> 
> Does the proposal provide all information as requested in the CFP,
> specifically: discussion theme and issues, format and approach, and panelists.
> Is this information clear and complete enough to properly describe an
> acceptable proposal? Does it appear than panellists are actually confirmed, or
> are they just invited, or only proposed?
> 
> 3. Diversity 
> 
> Will the proposed session represent viewpoints from multiple stakeholder,
> geographic, economic and/or cultural perspectives? Are listed panelists
> properly qualified to represent one or more distinct s! takeholder groups?
> Will the session contribute to the overall diversity and multi-stakeholder
> representation of the APrIGF event?
> 
> 
> Each proposal will be evaluated on each criterial, with a score between 1 and
> 4 as follows: 
> 
> 4 = criteria is fully satisfied
> 3 = acceptable 
> 2 = needs improvement
> 1 = absent 
> 
> (giving each proposal a total score between 4 and 12. For averaging purposes,
> a rating of 0 will not be counted)
> 
> 
> D. Proposal Ratings
> -------------------
> 
> Following the assembly of the selection committee, committee members will
> submit their proposal ratings to the APrIGF secretariat, using the agreed
> ratings form. After the deadline for submission, the secretariat will publish
> a report of proposals showing the anonymised ratings received, average rating,
> and rank order from highest to lowest average rating. The ratings given by
> specific (named) individual committee members will not be published.
> 
> 
> E. Selec! tion Process
> --------------------
> 
> As its next meeting afte r publication of proposal ratings, the MSG will
> consider the list of rated proposals and select proposals in order of average
> rating, in consideration of diversity of the proposals, and possible merger of
> proposals which involve duplication of content, theme or issue.
> 
> During this discussion, selection committee members may modify their ratings,
> providing this can be achieved in a secure real-time manner.
> 
> The final decision of the MSG will be made by consensus. MSG members with
> personal involvement in any proposal (as proponent, panelist, subject, or
> otherwise) may submit rating for such proposals and participate in the
> discussion but may not block not the consensus of the MSG.
> 
> After this meeting, the selected proposals (including proposals for mergers)
> will be published on the MSG mailing list and APrIGF website.
> 
> --- 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Rigf_program mailing list
> Rigf_program at aprigf.asia
> https! ://mailman.dotasia.org/mailman/listinfo/rigf_program
> 
> 
    


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.dotasia.org/pipermail/rigf_secretariat/attachments/20130613/3a9cdace/attachment-0001.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 5037 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mailman.dotasia.org/pipermail/rigf_secretariat/attachments/20130613/3a9cdace/attachment-0001.bin 
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Rigf_program mailing list
Rigf_program at aprigf.asia
https://mailman.dotasia.org/mailman/listinfo/rigf_program