Dear all, I recognize that my previous posting might be perceived as uncharismatic, sorry, I'll try to do better. Here goes: A process for review was established with a specific timeline for discussion ("a period of approximately 6 weeks" [1]). It was perhaps hard to foresee how many comments would appear and when they'd appear. An issue I perceive is that the current schedule could end up leaving little to no room for people to respond to other people's comments - if such comments were made at the last moment. Now, the next phase is scheduled to be the "Final Review", it'll be awkward if that's the next best moment to react to comments made in the previous phase "Community Feedback on the Draft Document". Worse, what if yet again comments are submitted at the very last moment? It might simultanously make people feel unheard and increase complexity for the document authors! I hope I now have clarified why I requested a deadline extension. Perhaps going forward, we can take some inspiration from the FCC's "Notice of Inquiry" process. A simplistic overview from what I understand the NoI process to be: review cycles are composed of a "comments period" (~ 1 month), then a "reply to comments period" (~ 1 month), and then deliberations. The scope of the "reply to comments" period is intended to be narrower than the scope of the comments period preceeding it. I believe that an opportunity to comment on other people's comments in such a way that this feedback too becomes part of the public concourse and subsequent ASO AC deliberations will positively help all involved navigating this process and result in an higher quality document. The work the various representatives and volunteers are doing is valuable and I'd like to express appreciation for what has been accomplished so far. I'd specifically like to say thank you for your service to Hervé, Constanze, and Andrei. Kind regards, Job [1]: https://web.archive.org/web/20250402040928/https://www.nro.net/policy/intern...