[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?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the ALAC