Toby mentioned in the paper that previous critical design research, tended to treat audience/participants as passive recipients of the design outcomes. Toby envisions speculative design as a collaborative process involving both the audience/participants and the designer, rather than being led solely by designers or researchers. This emphasis on public participation is vital for breaking down the monopoly on dialogues and fostering innovation. Furthermore, public participation can lead to a re-evaluation of speculative design, with the final reflection stemming from a broader discussion, rather than being confined to paper writing.

The emphasis on public participation is also intended to counter the limitations and arrogance of technological elites. This theme （Evolve with the times）is still actively discussed today, and contemporary speculative design faces the challenge of technological and highly polished commercial works monopolising relevant content (like black mirror, hard to use their performance and tech stander for all works). I believe that the high level of public involvement mentioned by Toby is something that commercial works lack. From a commercial perspective, public participation may not be the most profitable option. However, from a speculative design perspective, this is an aspect worth advocating and exploring.

Simultaneously, the author challenges the status and influence of exhibitions concerning the sustainable impact and cyclical nature of speculative design. He suggests that exhibitions should be questioned and challenged rather than viewed as the termination and authority of a project. In my opinion, projects should not have a distinct endpoint; they should have the potential for continuous development based on ongoing questioning by stakeholders and participants. I had not thought much about this aspect before because in my initial understanding, public participation in the final steps of design works was mostly about making improvements to the user experience and addressing issues such as technical implementation. However, the bidirectional nature of public participation and feedback should be more evident. Public involvement should aim to be more constructive and sincere, which aligns with Toby’s perspective.

Nevertheless, guiding the public or stakeholders to participate constructively is a challenging task. In previous projects, I have interacted with clinical psychologists, but most time they only showed respect and approval of the project. Even when they offered feedback, it was related to the experience rather than the content itself, but their expertise does not lie in the user experience but in the content. But on the other hand, with projects involving strong concepts, narratives, or viewpoints, a larger audience is more likely to engage. They may not be as professional but are more inclined to express their opinions. However, this so clear and strong content can lead to a lack of space for the audience to imagine and contemplate. This raises a significant question: how can we strike a balance between abstract designs that may not stimulate enough engagement and highly specific designs that leave little room for interpretation and reflection? This is an issue I need to contemplate and explore further.

Toby also introduces the concept of “designer-decentered” thinking in speculative design projects. I interpret this as adopting a role of initiating and guiding the project. The limited degree of public participation in my previous projects may largely result from later restrictions and a more private nature of these projects. Therefore, how to coordinate and guide interactions between the audience and users, and the necessity for this, is something I will need to consider. This will require a shift from a hierarchical to a networked relationship.

In conclusion, Toby’s paper has provided me with a fresh perspective on public participation in speculative design. It has challenged my preconceived notions and highlighted the need for public involvement to be more constructive and genuine. This new understanding will be essential as I continue my work in the field of speculative design. This can serve as a critical reference for my project.