[NCSG-PC] Proposal : Quick Guidelines for Public Comment Writing

[Rafik Dammak]

Hi Dorothy,

if I may respond to the questions:

2018-04-04 7:42 GMT+09:00 dorothy g <dgdorothydg at gmail.com>:

> Good job Farell. I am sure people will find this helpful. My first point
> would be most people will not read long comments. A few staffers have no
> choice but to read them and summarize them. Our goal should be to be
> succinct.  This usually takes more effort but it should help us to be clear
> and less subject to misinterpretation.  We should also avoid emotional
> statements (in general).
>
>
staff will summarize all comments in report within few weeks from the the
closure of public comment. to be  honest, I don't have strong opinion about
having passionate comments or not because at the end all comments are
summarize and consolidate, so tone may not important. The WG members will
review the summary and decide based on all comments to make revision to
report or not (it depends of the stage, it is easier to influence a initial
report than a final report) . I think the length may be correlated to the
length of report itself and its complexity (how many areas it covers e.g.
the budget and operation plan). Few recommendations won't raise so much
comments but if we have around 20 or more recommendations , we should
expect longer response as we may even propose change on wording or go into
(devil) details. I guess at the end we will have to find balance and from
previous comments submitted by NCSG, few were long (budget, CCT-RT )



> My next question would be, how do we evaluate the effectiveness of a
> public comment? How often are our concerns taken into account in final
> decision making? In drafting comments we need to understand the policy
> context and mindset of the eventual decision makers.
>
>
short answer: it depends.
Public comment is a tool and milestone within a whole process and long
lifecycle. If we assume different levels of effectiveness, I would say the
best is to have active members  of WG from the beginning and volunteering
to be penholder within a subgroup, that ensures that we can steer and shape
discussion.  They can influence the process from inside and public comment
can helpful for them to push in some direction and support their position.

that is why we encourage and try to be present in all working groups (PDP
or CCWG) and worked to some extent like in CCWG accountability.  those
members can also ensure that our comments are reviewed and considered in
the recommendations revisions. They also can support for drafting comments
and guide other volunteers. we usually found more issues to respond to
comment where we dont have coverage or not really PDP process. there are
other public consultations initated by staff and ICANN as organization and
so the public comment is the only mean to input and influence the process.

I usually check the staff report and amiling list archives to check if our
comments were considered but we need better follow-up maybe from the
drafters and/or members  of WGs in particular for the comments review in WG
deliberations.

Best,

Rafik



>
>
> On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 10:03 PM, Farell FOLLY <farell at benin2point0.org>
> wrote:
>
>> Dear All,
>>
>> Following The NCUC Policy and Public Comment Writing Course I
>> participated in in San Juan, I committed to suggest a few guidelines to
>> guide people who will volunteer to draft public comments in the future. It
>> can also helps us within the PC to quickly assess a document by using a
>> common framework. Most of the contents derived from the course which was
>> very appreciated by all the participants.
>>
>> Please see the document here
>> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1P1-Kuw_nS6uul7f3P-z6C3EopU8s3QP_BZhS0PRnm0o/edit?usp=sharing>
>>
>>
>>    1. The first page briefly outlines the key point to focus on while
>>    drafting a comment : Feel free to comment or make any suggestion that can
>>    help improve it.
>>    2. The second page is intended to help the new drafter start writing
>>    a comment by answering the questions directly : feel free to add more
>>    questions or modify the existing ones.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> @__f_f__
>>
>> Best Regards
>> ____________________________________
>>
>> Ekue (Farell) FOLLY
>> Technology Champion & Chapter Head
>> Africa 2.0 Foundation.
>> farell at benin2point0.org
>> www.africa2point0.org
>> linkedin.com/in/farellf
>> twitter.com/@__f_f__
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> NCSG-PC mailing list
>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NCSG-PC mailing list
> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20180404/c9432716/attachment.htm>