[Vision2020] Posting Fuss

Sun Nov 13 12:03:32 PST 2005

Ellen, BJ, Janesta, Pat, et al,

Perhaps the idealized model of an old time town hall meeting was the original inspiration for what Vision 2020 might be.

In a town hall meeting citizens get together to discuss various issues of concern to all and/or perhaps issues of concern to a few.  Only one person is allowed to talk at a time.  Interruptions are not allowed.  A time limit may be placed upon each speaker's initial presentation.  Speakers are expected to only make statements relevant to the issue(s) under consideration.

Further, not only is everyone expected to be civil to each another, but certain topics are "just not brought up" like Aunt Emma's startling biliousness or Parson Doug's surreptitious, hungry-eyed leerings at young boys and girls.  There is a chair of the meeting who enforces the rules and to some extent directs the course of the discussion.

I do not know if many real world examples of that idealized model exist.

Public hearings on zoning matters are supposed to incorporate that model.  Those that attended some of the recent meetings in Moscow over zoning issues know that they do not meet the standards above:  Some speakers were allowed to greatly exceed their time limits while the chair did not recognize others who wanted to speak, the range of discussion subjects was restricted, there were rancorous remarks made, irrelevant information was presented and discussed, and the chair sometimes failed to control the meeting and failed to focus the discussion in constructive directions.

Perhaps there is another model which better describes what Vision 2020 is at present:  Hyde Park or Pershing Square.  Various groups cluster around a particular speaker or a crowd which is discussing a particular topic.  Some of the intercourse is civil, some not.  The speaker is sometimes interrupted by cat calls.  Not only is the speaker's ancestry or species membership sometimes questioned, but her/his knowledge and authority, and sometimes surprisingly, whether what he/she is saying is true, relevant, cogent, and comprehensive is also questioned.

If you have ever been to places like Hyde Park or Pershing square, you know that many of the groups center around crackpots.   However, there are some discussions that are informative, quasi-fact based, and well worth the investment of time to listen and/or participate for at least a little while.

Though both models described above serve purposes, the purposes are not exactly the same:

The town hall meeting generally has a definite goal of bringing about official action by those in authority attending the meeting or who otherwise will be informed of some of the things which occurred at the meeting.  At these meetings the quasi-chaos of freewheeling expression is kept at a minimum so that an orderly progression towards a solution of some kind is possible.

The Hyde Park/Pershing Square types of interactions are basically free wheeling discussions which illustrate both the power and foibles of allowing free expression.  Further, participants in these interactions are not going to immediately enact laws, etc, although some of the knowledge and points of view that emerge may later influence official public actions.  Also:  There is little doubt that Hyde Park/Pershing Square type interactions provide for some of its viewers/participants great entertainment.

The price of following the town hall model is that some kinds of fruitful expression of ideas do not occur.  Also, dialogue/short, back and forth exchanges/cross examination is very difficult if not impossible to accommodate.  Hence, there is a probable loss of useful information and a high probability that false information and even outright lies will unquestionably accepted.

A discussion at Pershing Square may or may not produce anything of value.  But, in my opinion and experience:

[1]   What happens at Pershing Square is the epitome of free expression.  It is limited, if at all, only by libel, slander, and breach of peace laws.  Each participant can experience the rush of feeling that comes with expressing and advocating their ideas, and also experience other feelings when their ideas are questioned or their ideas and/or their personhood are attacked.

[2]   What happens at Pershing Square type discussions also illustrates the astounding power of free expression.  In my occupational experiences as a systems engineer, what happens in the backrooms of many businesses and organizations when important decisions are being made is much better described as a Pershing Square type interaction than a town hall meeting.  Some believe that Vision 2020 discussions get too rancorous, and hence their value is negated.  Most Vision 2020 discussions are mild in terms of personal attacks, use of "vile" language, and other verbal violence when compared to some of the corporate/organizational discussions I have witnessed, discussions which eventually led to the production of innovative, sound businesses/organizational decisions of ontological organizational importance.

The English poet John Donne wrote:

"No man is an island."

Today, many see that sentence as an early acknowledgement of the complex interconnectiveness of all things on this planet and perhaps in the universe.  Though not affecting the Palouse with the same or great magnitude, many things that happen elsewhere affect and influence in someway what happens on the Palouse.

Thus, it would be hard to say of any topic, that that topic is irrelevant to all local issues.  Hence, some might not see the relevance of some postings to local issues, but some may, and further find those postings useful and informative.  Example:  There was a posting yesterday of the use of religion by both sides in WalMart controversies.  If you saw the email header or even read the article and thought "What does this have to do with Moscow?", just watch what happens when various factions begin discussing with heat the no longer secret proposal of a WalMart superstore in Moscow.

There is another important way that Vision 2020 is like the Pershing Square model.  A person can decide whether to listen to and/or to participate in a particular discussion.  If they do not care for one discussion or discussion topic, they can simply walk to another.

On Vision 2020 such choices are much less energy consuming:  With the expenditure of less than 1/8 calorie and less than two seconds, the delete key may be effectively used and may even bring some a great pleasurable rush associated with the power of preemptively dismissing a particular poster or poster.

Suppose you were to go to Hyde Park and after a brief listen, decide on several occasions to move on from some group or other to another group more to your tastes/interests.  Would you then advocate that those groups whose subjects or whose manner of expression you did not like be banned from speaking at all in Hyde Park?

I hope not.

Accordingly, I hope that those who advocate freedom of expression and tolerance of the expression of opinions do not try to limit the expression of opinion or the topics/modes of expression that occur on Vision 2020 that are not to their tastes/interests.

We are extremely fortunate to live in a country where free of expression is minimally curtailed.  We live in an area where First Step Internet has generously provided a forum where free of expression can not only thrive but can help birth and/or help shape ideas which have impact on Moscow and elsewhere on the Palouse.

Some subjects are complex and are related to other complex subjects.  Sometimes there are many facets to what appears at first glance to be a very simple subject.  Hence, the posts on some subjects may be much longer and generate a series of longer complicated posts.  We cannot expect Mark Solomon or Phil Nisbet, for example, to argue for a particular hydro-geological position in a few short sentences or paragraphs.  Some subjects are open to shorter, more dialogue-like interchanges; however, the total number of words generated by a series of short exchanges may exceed those generated by a few longer posts.

There is the question of bandwidth.  Some long posts or those in HTML, XML, etc, especially those with graphics may strain some participants' bandwidth capabilities.

There are solutions for this problem.  For one, some email programs allow the user to download at first only a little bit of information about a particular email including the sender, the subject, and the size of the email.  Using that information, the user can decide whether to download the entire email.  Also, a post may be downloaded in plaintext from Vision 2020 Archives to avoid the bandwidth burden of downloading a HTML file.

Perhaps for some people this posting fuss is about something else, something that is analogous to and illustrated by the following definition by H.L. Mencken:

Puritanism:   The haunting fear that someone, somewhere, may be happy.

I suspect that some people's objection to the subject and/or length of some Vision 2020 posts is rooted in their fear of what might be said in those posts, and that other some people may take these objectionable things seriously and learn from them.  I also suspect that these people greatly fear that some thoroughly enjoy the entertainment value of certain Vision 2020 posts, vituperative or not.

For those who believe in freedom of expression as a fundamental right and a bountiful source of ideas, and also believe in tolerating other opinions, at least to the extent of allowing them to be expressed, it would seem inimical to try to limit the topic, size, number, and/or content (outside of intentional, knowing libel) of Vision 2020 posts.

For those people that wish to impose such limits, those readers who have courageously and laboriously read this far can decide for themselves whether such people really understand and cherish the freedom of expression and its fruits we (thankfully to all who have sacrificed protecting this freedom) enjoy as Americans.

Wayne A. Fox
1009 Karen Lane
PO Box 9421
Moscow, ID  83843

(208) 882-7975
waf at moscow.com

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20051113/00e0deb8/attachment-0001.htm