[Vision2020] LMT Feb 19 -- Cyber soapbox stirs debate

[Phil Nisbet]

Dan

Darn.  I used the first two questions of that survey to set up a joke and 
the punchline got cut.

He also cut my general assesment that the board serves as a hope for healing 
rifts rather than creating them.  Not that the hope is always fullfilled, 
but its a chance.

Look at the Cedars issue.  All stripes are willing to work on it as a 
comunity.  This board allows people to put aside who brings forward the idea 
or their grouping to get a good thing done.

Phil Nisbet


>From: "AreaMan" <areaman at moscow.com>
>To: "'Moscow Vision 2020'" <vision2020 at moscow.com>
>Subject: [Vision2020] LMT Feb 19 -- Cyber soapbox stirs debate
>Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2006 08:06:55 -0800
>
>Part 3 -- The Big One:
>------------------------
>
>Cyber soapbox stirs debate; Is unique forum a wild ride on free-speech
>express or a vicious circle for Moscow mud-slingers to spew their brand
>of venom? That depends on who you ask
>
>By DAVID JOHNSON of the Tribune
>
>MOSCOW -- The original soapbox in Hyde Park was made of wood and became
>a universal symbol of free speech.
>
>Orators from the dimwitted to the rhetorically superior still gather at
>the corner of London's Park Lane and Cumberland Gate to publicly spout
>their opinions.
>
>A contemporary Hyde Park variant can be found in this Latah County
>college town. But instead of wood, the soapbox is made of cyberspace
>technology. And after 12 years, say those who speak through their
>computer keyboards, the Vision 2020 e-mail list has become both a
>vehicle for, and a target of fiery debate.
>
>Some call the Vision 2020 experience a quintessential online exercise in
>First Amendment rights, brimming with smart talk and generating valuable
>public discourse.
>
>Others brand it "Venom 2020" and mock the local Internet medium as a
>bane to civil dialogue, laced with pettiness and dominated by
>self-important windbags.
>
>One thing for sure -- Vision 2020, in all its unfettered unruliness, has
>defined itself as the kind of soapbox that continues to push the
>boundaries of free speech, perhaps, some fear, to the point of eventual
>self-inflicted silence.
>
>*****
>
>The disclaimer that appears on the Vision 2020 Web site is laced with
>lawyer talk such as, "This list is only the vehicle that facilitates
>this public discourse, and no person or hosting ISP is responsible for
>the content."
>
>The site is offered and maintained by First Step Internet, a
>Moscow-based Internet service provider.
>Bill Moore, director of technology for First Step Internet, calls the
>company's sponsorship of Vision 2020 a "scary," money-losing proposition
>rooted in public service and vulnerable to the kind of verbal wars that
>would render most television censors, newspaper editors and libel
>attorneys speechless.
>
>"It really gets to be a free-for-all," Moore says. "We refuse to enforce
>any rules."
>
>In fact, virtually everything that's been written on Vision 2020 since
>1994 -- every vitriolic attack, all words of wisdom, every cuss word,
>all political insights, every partisan cheap shot, all public service
>announcements, every unfounded allegation, all the eloquent rhetorical
>essays, and every dumb sentence -- has been preserved. It exists in the
>Vision 2020 archives and is available to anyone who logs on to the Web
>site.
>
>What's more, subscribers can pound out any message they want, or they
>don't have to write a lick. They can simply lurk behind the scenes.
>
>"Most of our subscribers are lurkers," confirms Moore. Of the nearly 500
>people currently subscribing to Vision 2020, he estimates only about 10
>percent are active contributors.
>"The heart and soul of this thing is only a dozen, maybe up to 50, who
>keep it going."
>
>The existence of a so-called "Dirty Dozen," says Moore, is bantered
>about. And indeed, there is a handful of people who post just about
>every day. Subject matter ranges these days from the war in Iraq and
>Wal-Mart super centers to local politics and religion.
>
>Of the public officials who subscribe, most use the site to make public
>service announcements. Some admit to lurking. A few match wits with
>other posters.
>
>"I utilize it to post my legislative letter each week along with special
>legislative news," says State Rep. Tom Trail, R-Moscow. "I do not engage
>in the day-to-day Vision 2020 exchanges."
>
>Keely Emerine Mix, a member of the Moscow School Board, opts to mix it
>up. "I post," she says, "because there's a point of view that I hold
>that isn't well represented, and that's of a biblically conservative,
>albeit politically somewhat liberal, evangelical."
>
>Moscow Mayor Nancy Chaney champions Vision 2020 as a vehicle for
>legitimate public debate and sometimes a means to set the record
>straight. During November's election, for example, a Vision 2020 post
>from an anonymous "Jane Doe" resurrected old, unsubstantiated rumors
>about Chaney's opponent, Peg Hamlett.
>
>"This is at least the third time people supporting Nancy Chaney for
>Mayor have resorted to this garbage and distortion of facts," retorted
>regular Vision 2020 poster Donovan Arnold of Moscow.
>
>Chaney promptly mounted her keyboard with a response: "You know that I
>am an honest, fair, civil, intelligent person," Chaney wrote.
>"Presumably, you will also surmise that I would have none of the tactics
>posted by the likes of Jane Doe. Please do not confuse my opinions,
>practices, or personal integrity with the likes of those who get their
>satisfaction from slinging mud."
>
>Other posters pounced on Jane Doe and the anonymous person went away.
>But some say the damage was complete. Hamlett lost the election.
>
>Moore winces when he ponders such exchanges. He concedes part of him
>wants to muzzle much of what shows up on Vision 2020, if not for the
>distortions and factual failings, then for the meanness and potentially
>libelous attacks.
>
>"Sometimes I think, 'you know what, this is getting out of control. We
>need someone to moderate it.' " But tampering with the posted messages,
>says Moore, could put the legal onus on First Step Internet. So he
>maintains the e-mail list, but keeps his hands off the content.
>
>"You can't hold the soapbox responsible," he reasons.
>
>****
>
>Bill London, a local writer and civic activist, is one of the founders
>of Vision 2020. He's quick to point out that Vision 2020 started as a
>"face-to-face" group of people concerned about growth in Moscow.
>
>Kenton Bird, now director of the University of Idaho School of
>Journalism and Mass Media, is also credited with starting Vision 2020,
>as is Susan Palmer, now a sociology professor at Walla Walla Community
>College.
>
>London remains linked to Vision 2020, in that he works with Moore to
>ensure the future of the electronic soapbox. And like Moore, London says
>Vision 2020 morphed from being a group of concerned citizens to a
>vehicle for discourse between concerned citizens.
>
>Greg Brown, who worked in computer services at UI, is credited with
>building the original vehicle. "I have taken the liberty of setting up a
>Vision 2020 listserv group," reads an e-mail he wrote in late 1994 and
>remains in the Vision 2020 archives. "This service will allow you to
>conveniently mail to everyone in the Vision 2020 list without
>maintaining a list of your own."
>
>Bird, according to the archives, was first to post.
>
>"Greetings," wrote Bird. "I'm so excited about our listserver I couldn't
>wait to try it out!"
>
>Bird, Palmer and Brown were the only ones to post messages during the
>first month Vision 2020 was up and running. The number of posts jumped
>to around 10 the next month, followed by more than 80 the month after
>and today the posts number between 30 and 60 per day, depending on how
>heated the issues might be.
>
>Once the electronic soapbox became an entity unto itself, say London,
>Bird and Palmer, it continued to morph into what has become a raspy
>exercise of First Amendment rights and unencumbered free speech.
>
>"I think it really exists on its own. It's like an amoebae scrounging
>around out there," says London, adding that a scrounging amoebae isn't
>always a pretty sight.
>
>"We were hoping that it would become a way for the public to educate
>themselves, and strengthen civic dialogue," London says of how he and
>others viewed Vision 2020 once it took on a life of its own. "Of course,
>to a great degree, it's a great failure because of the pettiness and
>name-calling."
>
>Bird and Palmer agree. Both say they rarely, if ever, post.
>
>"I haven't looked at Vision 2020 probably since the fall of 2004, the
>presidential election," Bird says. "It wasn't so much the tone of the
>discourse as much as the shear volume that drove me off." Bird says his
>e-mail account is flooded enough without having it overflow with Vision
>2020 posts. His colleagues, however, continue to lurk and keep him
>posted about the dialogue.
>
>Palmer says she doesn't even lurk. "I'm a little disillusioned," she
>says. "For awhile it had a great public service aspect. For example, my
>cat got lost."
>
>Palmer says she posted news of the lost cat and it was found a few hours
>later.
>
>That sort of thing continues to happen on Vision 2020. Lost dogs and
>cats are found. People exchange recipes. Agendas for public meetings are
>posted. And even the debates, more often than not, end with good things
>happening, London says.
>
>The failures, contends London, pale in comparison to the unique service
>Vision 2020 continues to provide and the potential for its participants
>to police themselves and actually raise the level of discourse.
>
>All that comes against assessments offered by the likes of Doug Wilson,
>pastor of Moscow's Christ Church and a perpetual target (some say by his
>own making) on Vision 2020. Credited and blamed for coining the idiom
>"Venom 2020," Wilson sums up the e-mail list by saying, "I think it's an
>embarrassment to the community."
>
>****
>
>At the request of the Lewiston Tribune, London came up with 12 of the
>more active posters on Vision 2020 and posted a request for them to
>contact the newspaper if they wanted to offer their assessment of the
>e-mail list.
>
>"My experience with things like this is that no good can possibly come
>of it," groused one person. "I would be happy to defer my position to
>someone else."
>
>Several people, however, jumped at the opportunity and offered their
>views via e-mail.
>
>"I believe that the most beneficial attribute of Moscow Vision 2020 is
>its openness," writes Tom Hansen, one of the more prolific contributors.
>"It is like a community social club with the proverbial soap box and an
>open mic 24/7. The biggest complaint that I have is when a topic
>degenerates to name calling. I have been guilty of it myself on
>occasion, although with less and less frequency."
>
>Writes Phil Nisbet, a relatively recent arrival to the list who posts
>regularly, "What's good about V 2020? It's a good early warning system
>for plans germinated by the left in Moscow. What's bad about it? Knowing
>what they plan requires you to respond, which in turn makes you a
>target."
>
>Joan Opyr, known locally as Auntie Establishment, sums up her regular
>participation as a means "to entertain, to inform, and to be part of the
>larger community conversation. I'm naturally gregarious. I'm also an
>incorrigible smart-ass. Vision 2020 helps me get in touch with my inner
>Groucho Marx."
>
>"Another bad thing about V 2020 is that some people think it adequately
>reflects the Moscow community at large," writes Dan Carscallen, another
>regular on the list. "Hogwash. While it is somewhat pervasive, there are
>still people in Moscow who don't even know what Vision 2020 is."
>
>****
>
>After all is never said and never done, because that is the nature of an
>unmoderated listserv, Vision 2020's future is as tenuous as its history
>is rancorous. London and Moore concede they don't like to even broach
>the idea Vision 2020 disappearing, but it's pretty obvious to anyone who
>really contemplates how and why Vision 2020 works.
>
>It works because it exists on its own -- unmoderated and unencumbered by
>the legal constraints of other media like television, radio and
>newspapers. Even the blogs on the Internet are usually sponsored,
>written or edited by a person who controls the site and therefore
>assumes some legal responsibility.
>
>Vision 2020 works differently because of First Step Internet's hands-off
>support. As Moore explains, his company is willing to maintain the
>soapbox, but has nothing to do with what those who climb aboard say
>about anything.
>
>"The idea is we do it for a public service," Moore says. So when people
>on both sides of issues and the political spectrum get upset with Vision
>2020, they howl to Moore.
>
>"We are walking that tightrope. Sometimes the right-wingers hate our
>guts, same with the left-wingers. We take this responsibility
>seriously."
>
>And therein lies the threat to Vision 2020's future.
>
>Because no one moderates the site, no one edits what's written. And when
>all that is written becomes part of the public discourse, Vision 2020
>becomes vulnerable to sabotage.
>
>Despite all the self-policing the participants attempt, the risk is
>always present that someone will push the free-speech envelop too far
>and First Step Internet might opt to dismantle the soapbox.
>
>"It's a little scary, so we're always watching and monitoring," Moore
>says.
>
>The Internet address for Vision 2020 is www.vision2020.moscow.com.
>Subscriptions are free.
>-----------------------
>It ain't easy bein' free,
>
>DC
>
>_____________________________________________________
>  List services made available by First Step Internet,
>  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>                http://www.fsr.net
>           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯

_________________________________________________________________
Don’t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! 
http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/