Towards Understanding the First MSH Meeting Polling Data

joehall

Hi everyone (and hopefully those that will come later!),

I read with interest the NTIA's release today encouraging stakeholders to work between the meetings on fleshing out some of the issues raised. However, I couldn't make heads or tails of the polling data they included in the release. So, I decided to revisualize the polling data using sparklines -- itty-bitty bar graphs. I think this makes it easier -- at least for me -- to compare the issues we raised and voted on at that first meeting:

https://josephhall.org/ntia-msh/polling-20120712.html

Let me know if you have any comments. best, Joe

npdoty

Thanks, Joe, these sparkline visualizations are a big help!

I'm not sure the present/remote distinction is key when trying to get a sense of the aggregate numbers. Is it easy to add a column that would combine the red/blue charts into a single chart for each line item?

joehall

Yeah, I should be able to do that quickly.

joehall

Ok, I've done this and it doesn't make much of a difference, although it's good to have. There's now a column of black sparklines labeld as "A" for "All".

upinion

Thanks Joe for developing the SparkLines. However, I had trouble distinguishing their meaningfulness where there were fewer votes compared to other votes.

My completely unscientific analysis of the responses to the non-binding referendums found the following issues to be extremely important to the group overall. I based my analysis on where there were 70 or more in-room participants who voted that an issue was absolutely critical and the remote participants were on average in agreement with that opinion.

This is the breakdown I came up with:

1. Which elements might be developed first?

a. Functional description of data use

b. Size of privacy policy/ simple language answers

c. What data outside of app functionality is accessed (e.g. contact lists)

d. Technology neutrality/ Platform agnostic

e. Understand economics of data use

f. Maintain intermediary protections

2. What might be included in the first phase of a common process?

a. Look at common/ current practices

b. Working groups focus on sub issues

Although there are some areas that I would have included in our starting point were it simply left up to me, I believe this provides us with clear guidance on what areas are considered critical to address first, as well as a practical manner in which to do so.

Ulla Pinion

Privacy and Security Analyst

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories

In this Discussion