The W3C is run by the same peers who frequent this and other tech forums. You can help by contributing to the organization, or you could hope for some internet points with snarky remarks. Which do you want to be remembered for?
For example, no amount of contribution would have stopped Netflix et al from pushing through EME as a web standard.
Or, perhaps more likely, browser vendors would continue to not kill Flash until 2020 (at the earliest) when Adobe ends support, and then browsers would drop support for the insecure plugin and then Netflix would go the native apps route.
If everyone is a "peer" and an enormous number of those peers make a succinct, persuasive argument that EME is incompatible with W3C's mission statement of "Web for All" and "Web for Rich Interaction"[1], one would think that would make a difference in the direction the W3C takes.
Instead I'm eating popcorn watching players with deep pockets choose tactics in their battle to control an industry. And that battle is what shapes this web API.
So the claim of, "your peers are listening and they value your feedback," is about as convincing as a hold message from Comcast.
They just seem to continuously standardize things that are very user hostile and only serve content distributors.
Example Nr 1 you are going to quote is the DRM stuff (understandably, it's the most controversial for good reasons, both inside and outside W3C). What other very user hostile examples are there?