Please find my tentative answers to our action items. I am writing this responses in my personal capacity. 
I was not in position to make any consultations in the community.

------
1. Check summary of responses document to check if responses are captured properly

I agree with the statement  that it was difficult to check if responses are captured properly, 
because not all respondent have answered by "yes" or "no"

I would also like to agree with Annebeth's  and Sanna’s opinion regarding General observations. 
"It could possibly be clearer if observation 2, instead of writing “status quo”, using the phrase, 
“Allowing 3-letter combinations not conflicting with ISO 3166-1 and not conflicting 
with any applicable string similarity rules – as gTLDs”. 
Status quo to day according to AGB is that those on ISO 3166-1 list are protected 
–all other 3-letter combinations are available as gTLDs."

-----
2. Is the diversity of responses a concern for you (and why)?

Diversity of responses is not a concern for me. 

--------
3. Please provide a suggestion how to move forward, specifically in light of the diversity

I would also agree with Sanna’s reflection how to proceed if it is not too much, or waste of time.
The WG could send another questionnaire, where the questions were more clear and the respondent 
could only answer "yes" or "no" and then rationalize the answer (if necessary)? 
The questionnaire could be an electronic form and the answers could be given with 
bulleted list (yes/no)...? 

Best regards
Mirjana Tasic