[Foundation-l] Why is it...
Anthere9 at yahoo.com
Fri Apr 27 01:29:10 UTC 2007
Ray Saintonge wrote:
> Delphine Ménard wrote:
>> ... that every time community input is asked on a subject by a board
>> member, little to none is given?
>> And why is it that every time the same things that were put up for
>> discussion are said "approved' or "official" suddenly everyone finds
>> something to say?
>> Shouldn't it be the other around?
> Welcome to Franz Kafka's real world!
> I often find that it's my most imaginative ideas that are ignored. When
> I read the messages of others it's easy when I can respond with a
> one-liner, but when someone like Anthere produces one of her most
> thoughtful comments to which I really want to reply I find myself
> paralyzed in contemplation with wanting to respond in a way that is just
> as thoughtful. The result is that much of what I want to say remains
> unsaid. Her comments to start the tread on "Governance" is a good
> example of that.
> In Boston you commented to me quite rightly that you find some of my
> posts interesting, but tending to come too late in the thread. I often
> wonder whether there is any cure for that. I completely avoid IRC,
> because by the time that I would be ready to make a thoughtful response
> everyone else would have moved on to a different topic. As my teenage
> son, who manages several chat room conversations at the same time says,
> "Dad, you think too much."
> Others who have responded to your request are quick to prescribe a set
> of steps or rules to deal with the problem. I don't think any of them
> will work, because we are dealing with a fundamental problem of human
> nature. This is compounded by the very real problem of information
> overload. That problem forces us to choose between alternative
> applications of our time, because it would be physically impossible to
> deal with all the demands.
> There is no easily apparent result when one is asked to express their
> ideas in a broadly visionary way. Learning to vision is just not a part
> of our upbringing. I can easily imagine Jimbo in January of 2001
> telling people about his plans for an encyclopedia, and receiving
> comments akin to Bill Cosby's "Riight! How long can tread water?" On
> the oher hand, when an apparently complete proposal is presented there
> is a near immediate response to specific criticism, and even an outright
> rejection can be satisfying if it comes immediately. It ties in with a
> broader need for instant gratification. Look at the energy that is
> often expended on deleting a tiny stub of an article with questionable
> notability. This absolutely ignorable backwater of the database becomes
> important by virtue of the emphasis on its unimportance. Nature's
> efficiencies include a tolerance for the useless. One can only wonder
> what would happen if the question of whether men should retain their
> nipples were put through one of our democratic processes.
> I think that we have a lot of broader social trends that come into play
> here than most people are not even willing to imagine. I do not use the
> term paradigm shift lightly, but I do see us stuvk in one where it is
> easy to sympathize with the offspring of the Grand Inquisitor who would
> do whatever it takes to preserve a comfortable established order.
> As we grow up we enclose and trap ourselves in a net of preconceptions.
> Democratic structures require a balance between diligence and trust
> before they can become fully effective. Trust also requires us to
> Assume Good Faith, and that's difficult to do when one is afraid of
> losing everything he doesn't have. It's so much easier to flounder
> about in Dante's fourth circle.
> Thank you Delphine for providing me with an opportunity to rant. ;-)
More information about the foundation-l