[Vision2020] PCEI Climate Change Forum Discussion On Local Blog

Chasuk chasuk at gmail.com
Sat Mar 29 16:12:48 PDT 2008

On Sat, Mar 29, 2008 at 3:43 PM, Ted Moffett <starbliss at gmail.com> wrote:

> Note to Chas, in case you are reading:

> You are probably correct I am wasting my "breath" in addressing the science
> of climate change on Vision2020.  Consider the results of my posts
> addressing PCEI's Climate Change Forum: not a single Vision2020 comment from
> anyone involved with PCEI, unless I missed it.  If PCEI is not following and
> contributing to environmental discussions on Vision2020, then Vision2020
> must not be viewed as relevant to environmental discussions impacting the
> public, scientific or otherwise.

I read virtually every post on Vision2020.  So do many people, but
they remain lurkers.  Over the years, when I've asked lurkers why they
lurk, they give a variety of answers.  Some are shy.  Some aren't
particularly shy, but they dislike conflict.  Others are afraid of
being ridiculed.  A few don't feel that they possess enough eloquence,
or they worry about their poor spelling.  What I'm saying is, don't be
disheartened.  I may think that you are wasting your breath, but only
insofar as expecting dialogue.  Your contributions are still valuable,
whether people respond or not.

Every on-line community seems to have its hot button topics,
guaranteed to generate a flurry of responses.  For Vision2020, those
topics are reliably Christ Church/Douglas Wilson/New Saint
Andrews/Neo-Confederates, Wal-Mart, the Iraq War, atheism/theism,
abortion, the ineptitude and/or dishonesty of our city council,
illegal immigrants, and, recently, the Hawkins development.  I'm
probably missing a few topics, but those are what I can list offhand.
Maybe every on-line community has a subconscious limit on the number
of topics it can handle simultaneously.  I don't know the answer.


More information about the Vision2020 mailing list