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,

Olivier