[EAS] Crowdsourcing and groupthink in FCC comment process

[Sean Donelan]

Crowdsourcing is a great way to generate and evaluate many ideas, when 
done well. Unfortunately, when done poorly groupthink can be the result.
When the convener states particular answer in advance, groups tend to 
spiral around that answer.

Echoing back the same language from the convener in response is one flag 
the process has become stuck in groupthink.

For example, the EAS NPRM comments have gotten stuck on a few words such 
as what does "repeating" mean.  Likewise, commentors got stuck on the word 
"national" versus "federal."

WEA (part 10) defines several levels of alerts, not originators.

  - Imminent threat (severe, extreme alert)
  - Child Abduction (amber alert)
  - Presidential
  - Tests (multiple types)

EAS (part 11) defines several originators, not levels of alerts.

  - primary entry point/emergency action notification network (PEP/EAN)
  - national weather service (WXR)
  - civil authority (CIV, includes military bases, etc)
  - EAS participants (EAS, originally broadcasters and cable systems)

The European Union Alert standard tries to avoid the language trap, by 
defining three levels of alerts Leve-1, Level-2, Level-3.

Both "national" and "federal" are terms with a lot of other meanings. 
Soverign Citizen groups will probably go just as bezerk as the term 
"presidential."  WEA should use a term about the alert behavior, not tied 
to a specific originator.

  - Critical (former "presidential")
  - Imminent (Extreme and Severe)
  - Child abduction / missing person
  - Non-emergency public safety information
  - Tests

Which would be tied to the user interface menu, for the different types 
of alerts.  I chose "critical" because it sounds important, but isn't tied 
to a specific originator or geography or emergency.  The unpublished 
FEMA "Concept of Operations" would specify who could send "critical" 
alerts, to what areas.

But the FCC has already made up its mind, and the groupthink in the 
comments will be used to justify its pre-made decision.