Any of you who really wants to know what's going on can join the effort of the representative organisations. I personally can speak only for PPL/IR and AOPA, but both organisations suffer from too little member involvement, not too much.
I happen to have personal issues with PPL/IR and with IAOPA, in particular with respect to their stance towards FAA PPL/IR's at some occasions in the past, which is why I don't join them. That is a purely personal choice and is off-topic here. I'm a contributing member of several other organisations, though.
Or you can sit at home on a forum and threaten to sue.
That is what several people I have spoken to are contemplating at the moment. I don't think they sit at home and I don't think the threat is in vain. That being said, going to court is something you only do as a last resort, because it is costly (around the price of an ab initio PPL-training) and results aren't due for about 12-18 months, more if the Commission or EASA are dragging it (a likely event in a serious court case).
Of course one should comment on NPA 2011-16. As as organisation, preferably, but also as an individual. I would urge everyone that can read or write to register for EASA's CRT application and produce meaningful, productive comments. This includes skimming through a 200+ pages legalese document with a yellow marker and thinking through possible solutions over a cuppa in bed at night. Not my favourite activity, but hey, we have only a few passions in life, and flying is one of them.
That being said, if my experience is anything to go by, my well thought through comments will be studiously ignored, as will those of many even more experienced pilots, flight instructors and examiners, no matter how reasonable and how astutely formulated.
All in all, I think your "black and white" representation of facts and categorizing of people is misplaced at best and I would urge you to introspect on this.