[ALAC] Bikeshedding [was Re: Open Public Comment Proceedings]

Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond ocl at gih.com
Sat Sep 2 22:09:46 UTC 2017

On 02/09/2017 23:37, Seun Ojedeji wrote:
> My question then was whether those active in it can help flag the
> issues while staff develop documents that provides background
> explanation which then helps those who are not quite active to have
> the opportunity to contribute which may then serve as sufficient
> information to improve participation in the WGs.

I am having a déjà-vu here. This recommendation has come numerous times.
At every iteration, things get a little better. Here's a typical page
for a public comment: https://community.icann.org/x/bRUhB

It's got a brief overview, a description and explanation, a background
and relevant resources plus additional information. What else do you
think is missing from this?

One thing that has been pointed out again and again is a section on "how
does this affect end users". Now I do not know if this is supposed to be
Staff-led or volunteer-led. It could be just one paragraph.

But what else do you think is needed? Should Staff actually point out
which PCs the ALAC should respond to? I don't think so. There comes a
time when a document needs to be read, when a PC needs to be looked at,
these handful of paragraphs that I have described above read, and a
decision needs to be made. All three involve the At-Large Community. And
by this, I mean EVERY MEMBER OF THE AT-LARGE COMMUNITY. If someone is
not there for this purpose, then what are they here for?

Kindest regards,

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/alac/attachments/20170903/86a1fd9a/attachment.html>

More information about the ALAC mailing list