<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 02/09/2017 23:37, Seun Ojedeji
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAD_dc6igfx7bd_96K1aaP2RKg=8jTo-t+pC2O6y-4ZuojCi3LQ@mail.gmail.com">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.</blockquote>
<br>
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:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://community.icann.org/x/bRUhB">https://community.icann.org/x/bRUhB</a><br>
<br>
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?<br>
<br>
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.<br>
<br>
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?<br>
<br>
Kindest regards,<br>
<br>
Olivier<br>
</body>
</html>