As a member of the association and a submitter (albeit small) to the code making process, I feel this new technology is not quite where it needs to be. I found the process of submitting the public inputs to be pretty easy. However with the release of the first draft this week there seems to be confusion on the comment process. In addition the information on the PI's seem to be scattered on several different pages.
For example most of us familiar with the old process relied on the ROC, for each proposal the following information was all in the same page or sequence, Submitter information
CMP's Decision (vote)
Affirmative and Negative statements from members to the panels statement.
In the new electronic format you have to download 2 documents and correlate between them to receive the same information. It seems that you have the PI with the panel statement on one download and to get the additional information you need to look at the final ballot to see the vote get the affirmative and negative statements. It would be nice to have all this information in a similar format to the old ROC method.
There also is a question out there (industry message boards and forums) regarding the comment process, it is believed that comments can only be made to accepted PI's and not rejected or reviewed PI's. Is this the case?