patth@dasys1.UUCP (Patt Haring) (12/12/87)
Welcome to NETWEAVER
The interactive, intersystem
newsletter of the
Electronic Networking Association
"Our purpose is to promote electronic networking in ways that
enrich individuals, enhance organizations, and build global
communities."
_______________________________________________________________
Volume 3, Number 11 November 1987
Copyright(c) by Electronic Networking Association (ENA), 1987
NETWEAVER is published electronically on Networking and
World Information (NWI), 333 East River Drive, East Hartford,
CT, 06108 (1-800-624-5916) using Participate (R) sofware from
Network Technologies International, Inc. (NETI), Ann Arbor, MI.
Managing Editor: Lisa Carlson
Contributing Editors: Mike Blaszczak
Al Martin
Stan Pokras
George Por
Peg Rossing
Tom Sherman
Philip Siddons
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
NETWEAVER is available via NewsNet, the world's leading
vendor of full-text business and professional newsletters
online. Read, Search or Scan all issues of NETWEAVER as TE55
in NewsNet's Telecommunications industry category. For access
details call 800-345-1301. In PA or outside the U.S., call
215-527-8030.
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
We *welcome* anyone interested in joining the Netweaver staff!
The deadline for articles for the next issue is
the 15th of the month.
KUDOS to the "porters," unsung heroes of the Network Nation!
One of them has brought this issue to you.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Volume 3, Number 11 ---CONTENTS--- November 1987
1 Masthead and Index
2 ENA UPDATE ................................ by Lisa Carlson
(1992 char)
Mark your calendars for the next ENA conference.
Everyone is invited to suggest ideas for the program
and to volunteer to participate in program planning
and development.
3 SOFTWARE FOR SELF-DEVELOPMENT ........... by David Eggleton
(4419 char)
A new special interest group is proposed within the
Boston Computer Society to focus on software which
encourages and supports individual self-development.
Comments are invited on this draft statement of the
scope of this topic.
4 BEYOND THE CLASSROOM .................. by Charles Findlay
(5088 char)
The new workplace environment requries a different way
of thinking about technology for training.
5 ELECTRONIC DEMOCRACY (Part III) ........... by Dave Hughes
(9238 char)
Dave Huges' ideas about the use of computer
conferencing to support the political process are
continued in this issue.
6 ELECTRONIC DEMOCRACY (Part IV) ............ by Dave Hughes
(9902 char)
7 ELECTRONIC DEMOCRACY (Comments) ........... by Don Strauss
(7859 char)
Don Strauss comments on "Electronic Democracy" and
suggests some new ways of thinking about citizen
participation in govenrmnet.
8 MEMBERSHIP FORM
ENA NETWEAVER Volume 3, Number 11, Article 2 November 1987
ENA Update
by Lisa Carlson
CALL FOR IDEAS
++++++++++++++
ENA Conference
May 12-15, 1988
Phildelphia, PA, USA
You are invited to submit *our* ideas for ENA's next f-t-f
conference!
suggestions for topics
nominations for speakers
proposals for workshops
ideas for special events
concepts for online participation
You are also invited to volunteer to be part of the conference
development team! We have started a planning topic, "May
Conference", on NWI. A parallel conference is being set up on
TWICS. More will follow. Send a message through your porter
if you would like to be involved or call Lisa Carlson at (703)
243-6622. ALL are welcome. There will be a preliminary
planning meeting to "walk the space" on Friday, November 13th
in Philadelphia. For more information about this meeting,
contact Stan Pokras online or at (215) 922-0227.
We're very excited about the opportunity to get together f-t-f
and share our ideas and experience. Mark your calendar now -
details will be published in NETWEAVER as they develop.
In this issue of NETWEAVER you can read more about the idea of
the season, "electronic democracy." Parts III and IV of the
Dave Hughes' writings on the subject (see Part I and II in the
October issue) are here along with another article by Don
Strauss with his comments on the subject.
You can also participate in the development of concepts for a
new special interest group on "Software for Self-Development"
within the Boston Computer Society and find out how a corporate
training specialist is using new technology in "Beyond the
Classroom."
Enjoy!
ENA NETWEAVER Volume 3, Number 11, Article 3 November 1987
Software for Self-Development:
A Work in Progress
by David S. Eggleton
Software for Self-Development is a distinct and unique category
of applications. The applications within the category provide
guidance and faciliation for selected aspects of "good
practice" (in self-development? or of ANY good practice? I
think it depends -- Yes, if the good practice will "rub off" on
the user). They support efforts of individuals who are
taking charge of their own long-term growth and development.
The guidance these applications provide demystifies such
activities as maintaining and increasing honest self-awareness
and employing effective techniques in thinking, feeling,
communicating, learning, and self-management. They facilitate
healthy and rewarding reliance on these fundamental yet
powerful activities. The best applications go further and
facilitate improved integration of these activities. This
integration parallels one of the worthy goals of
self-development effort.
These applications are functional tools. They do not establish
or require a separate training environment. They do not leave
adoption and implementation of the good practice to chance in
an indifferent or hostile work environment. Rather, once they
are installed, they are part of the work environment. Thus,
they readily and directly empower users to employ and profit
from the self-development practices that are meaningful and
promising for them. They can turn "I really should" into "I
did!" But for historical reasons, a special computing
environment may be desireable, if not necessary, for their
effective use.
Like other tools, Software for Self-Development can be used
again and again. Their use does not consume the value they
hold for the user. In fact, quite the opposite is usually
true: the more one uses them properly, the more useful and
powerful they can become. This is especially true of the
applications that elicit, store, and report information. A
meaningful, up-to-date database is itself a tool.
An application in the category of Software for Self-Development
promises one or some of the following:
- gives one new permission and "strength" to find or make
one's own way through life/the world;
- helps one know oneself;
- helps one clarify and stay focused on personal goals and
objectives;
- helps one process feelings and thoughts so one can use
them (not lose them) and/or
- enables one to more effectively manage (plan, track,
control, personal growth and development efforts;
- helps one learn and understand;
- acknowledges that many significant activities and
performances must occur away from computers, and thus
facilitates reflection upon and preparation for them.
Software for Self-Development exists today. It is developed
and published by various companies or it is developed by
personal computer users who do not publish their work. Although
I have not seen every application in the category as yet, I am
confident that users of each popular computer (IBM &
compatibles, Apple II series, Macintosh, Atari, Commodore) can
avail themselves of one or more of these applications. My
research shows that there are almost twenty products for the
IBM PC that meet several of the above criteria.
While there certainly are limits to the support a personal
computer may give a person with aspirations, it is just as
likely that the suport it can give now is worthwhile and that
many of the limits will be redefined again and again by
innovative software entrepreneurs.
Software of such personal importance is very possibly what the
home "computer" market has been waiting for. And when you stop
and think about it, it is difficult to see the end of the
socio-economic, even political, implications of such software.
Thought tools that relatively few individuals have exploited in
the past to achieve personal success can now be made useful to
each person who can get near a computer.
-------------
Author's note: Comments are invited from others interested in
software for self-development ... and you are invited to
participate in the development of a special interest group on
this subject within the Boston Computer Society. Contact
David at 20 Richardson Ave, Arlington, MA 02174.
ENA NETWEAVER Volume 3, Number 11, Article 4 November 1987
Beyond the Classroom:
New Directions in Learning and Work
by Charles A. Findlay
Early industrial training was modeled on the same rote, step-by-step
process that took place in the classroom and the factories of the
industrial era.
These educational methods and ways of organizing work met the needs
of a predominantly manufacturing society. However, the demands of a
new rapid paced information society are causing business and
industry
leaders to challenge their old assumptions of training and the
characteristics of the human resources required to succeed in the
new
workplace.
Workers have difficulty keeping up with the changing demands of
their
jobs, and getting up-to-date information in a way that enables them
to do their jobs effectively. One issue is business
competetiveness,
and the new balance of learning and work is of vital interest to
everyone who seeks a sustained competetive advantage in an
increasingly competetive business environment. Today, businesses
are
employing different methods to help cope with the need to rapidly
learn new methods and ways of doing business.
Traditional training methods are not really adequate for today's
environment. They're necessary but not sufficient. Training,
typically is looked at as an end-point. It's just the beginning of
what could be going on in the workplace. As needs change, new
alternatives are demanded. Some take us Beyond the Classroom. Some
will utilize the classroom in new ways.
Today, there is a demand for a range of learning environments to
meet
the increasing range of needs. We are exploring these now.
We are looking at new ways of helping adult learners and new
methodologies to meet the demands of an increasingly technological
society. And we are beginning to see that technology can be a great
help in all this. People are using the computer in new ways and
finding that advanced communications and computer technology can
create environments where the distinctions between work and learning
breakdown, permitting new collaborations and, equally, more personal
ways of learning.
At Brown and MIT, these explorations are taking education in new and
exciting directions where computers become tools for learning and
for
working - real educational partnerships. We are also beginning to
see the use of electronic networks for distributed global learning
environments.
We are also beginning to see the need for new human relationships in
an increasingly technological workplace ... new relationships
between
manager and worker, and as thse universities show, new collaborative
relationships between teacher and learner.
Clearly, we are in a time of transition and there are as yet no
clearly defined solutions, no final answers. However, we do
visualize that the computer-supported environment of the present
will
give way to a computer-integrated future where learning and working
become less and less distinguishable. Learning becomes part of a
person's ongoing job responsibilities - an active part of the job
rather than a passive endeavor.
The progress we are making today in artificial intelligence and
information technology will help us make these new integrated
environments possible. In the new industrial workplace, intelligent
job aids will reduce the learning time and the complexity of the job
for many workers. One form these job aids will take is that of an
intelligent tutor embedded into software programs.
In the new information work environment, physical environments may
begin to look the same - the difference will be in the information
handled. The information worker today is struggling to keep up with
an ever increasing amount and diversity of information. In response
to these increasing demands, individuals will begin to integrate
intelligent database management systems into their work. The
executive of tomorrow will have the opportunity to specify the way
she wants to organize, store, and retrieve information needed to do
a
job. Personalized Decision Support tools will also help the future
worker monitor and customize information appropriate to the person's
specific learning and information requirements.
Many of the specific details about the future are still speculative.
But, one thing we can say for certain is this: our future still
depends more on how we use information than on the delivery of the
information itself.
It is a wide-open time - a time for research, a time for reflection,
a time for action, as together we collectively define what our
vision
of what learning and work can be.
-------------
Author's note: Charles Findlay, Senior Instructional Designer at
Digital Equpment Corporation, presented these ideas at a session
at "Education For the 21st Century", a conference co-sponsored by
the World Future Society Education Section and the Cambridge Center
for Adult Education (as part of their 50th anniversary celebration).
The session was called "Integrated Learning and Information Support
Systems for the Information Age Worker."
ENA NETWEAVER Volume 3, Number 11, Article 5 November 1987
Electronic Democracy
Part III
by Dave Hughes
September 17
============
If a Congressman - besides doing those costly mail-outs to
individuals intheir district *also* put the bills and issues
'on line' locally, a whole lot more people could become
involved. Then all that is needed are for some of those
organizations like the League of Women Voters and similar
public interest/issues local groups to set up terminals and
printers in public places to help those who can't do it for
themselves, get the information and *feedback* their opinions.
A whole new role for non-partisan public-interest groups will
have to emerge before this works like it can, should.
The first 'loop-back' of the online debate over the County
operations occured last night and this morning, which
demonstrates how the online electronic democracy needs to be
linked with other forms of public communications.
Don MacDonald, KVOR morning talk-show host dialed in last night
to Chariot and learned at log-in to Roger's Bar (the public
issues section) about the 'County' conference and the verbatim
committee report. He was *really* exited and said to me in
private mail that he was going to dive in this morning to the
county fee-collection flap, which one Commissioner managed to
get supressed in the final report.
So this morning at 7:15 he dialed back with his Macintosh,
flipped on the printer, and printed out the 30 or so
response-discussion about the fee collection, including the
case law, statutes, tables of figures and most importantly, the
comments made about all this by the 'public' online. He took it
to the studio, went on the air at 9:00 am for his 2 hours talk
show, READ ALOUD extracts of the print out, including the
statute, the figures, and the comments by the man who put the
stuff on line and expressed concern. Then invited call ins.
About 50% of all the back-to back callers to the show took up
on this issue. He asked me to call and say on the air how
people could call state "home" offices for Members. There is
much your local office could do to support your interest in
being involved and communicating with your representative.
Oh I am sure there is some very expensive online Legislative
Service in DC. But this Republic will *not* move into the
Information Age politically when 'public information' costs $50
an hour. And it does *not* have to cost that much. It is the
economics of] 'government' at work here, not the economics of
people. I costed out the capital investment required to set up
a system like Chariot's in Denver for one man, using a PC, an
optical reader, and a unix/xenix system with the capacity to
hold 100% of all legislation going through the Colroado State
Legislature, for online fee-charging accees. $20,000 total cost
to capitalize the business, charges of from $5.00 an online
document to $200 a month for 24 hour unlimited access by such
entities as newspapers, lobbyists, organizations. Guranteed to
have all daily amendments online within 2 hours of the close of
the legislative day.
The guy who would run it could make a living at it!
I am radical enough in my online Electronic Democracy views
that I beleive that the US government should set up terminals
in Post Offices for free public use, that guarantees all US
citizens free access to *all* public documents - up to some
specified level each month, fee charging above that.
[Continuing the earlier story] I was asked to call into the
radio station, did, told everyone that all were welcome, gave
out the number, and people are now dialing in across the town.
And this afternoon Commissioner Meier asked for instructions on
how to log in, would it be free or would he have to subscribe.
Something to think about on this 200th Anniversay of the
Consititution, when thinking about bbs and small conferencing
systems and Electronic Democracy. Someone complained on a BBS
in town which contained some passionate arguements during the
last days of the Sales Tax campaign that 'only 30 people were
reading this bbs'. The Sysop (who himself had been a County
Commissioner before) reminded everybody that history tells us
that the Federalist Papers were only distributed to 100 people
during the American Revolution. It aint how many, but who.
September 24
============
Our little experiment in Electronic Democracy is at least
forcing the decision-makers to think harder - even in the
media. After getting a printout of the discussion of the County
fee flap, by a reporter, a senior editor gulped and backed away
from a story on one aspect because he was afraid the paper
would be sued!! And one of the County Commissioners spent 18
minutes online this afternoon, just looking. Meanwhile the
Public Health Director added to his spirited defense of his
Department, against the recommendations of the committee.
Now a little side note - that I'll bet is chronic in electronic
debates. Three County Commissioners met in secret and read a
print out of the whole conference, gotton offline by one of
their people who did not identify himself as such when he came
online. And they seem concerned and uncomfortable.
How do you think I, as sysop, should handle the phenomonon of
'government employees/elected officials' in mufti online?
The Pikes Peak Journal - small town (Manitou Springs - adjacent
to Colorado Springs) newspaper, which is the political base for
the Chairwoman of the Commission - Marcy Morrison is now online
in the thick of things, because a developer-backed woman named
Brooke Sunderland is going to run against her. Brooke has asked
to talk to me. So I shall offer her the opportunity to come on
line and debate Marcy online.
Then the voters can decide for themselves.
No guarantee they will. But then as it slowly dawns on
candidates that online *everything* they have to say will be
'published' (which is never the fact in other media), they just
might do it. But what's new? 5 years ago a man running for
County Sheriff against two well heeled candidates, one the
incumbant, came on my BBS and said he was going to announce his
candidacy online - and tell the press to dial in to read all
about it. (They did). I told him he would never win that
election from a BBS because the base of callers was too small
then. His answer was insightful. "I don't have much of a chance
anyway. But this BBS is issues, not personalities and
advertising oriented. I think there are some issues that need
to be discussed. So I choose this forum."
He was right. He lost, but the issues he raised online were
picked up by monitoring candidates, and they argued them in
public! Stay tuned!
September 26
============
In some hot voice exchanges the editorial director of a local
television station, which carries a nightly editorial, and has
lately been yammering away about the Budget report, has asked
for a logon id and password to Chariot. That makes two
newspapers, a radio station, and a television station that are
into the political discussion area online.
And today, when I was picking up my copy of "Teledemocracy"
which started out this item, the wife of the book store owner
who is the President of the Colorado Springs Symphony was
asking about it, and now is going to come on line (as she said
"Our symphony has a computer!") to 'correct all the
misstatements in the press about the <County owned, and
subsidized> Pikes Peak Center.' The Symphony depends upon the
center, which is new, classy, and costs the taxpayers $230,000
a year in subsidies (so that groups can use this public
auditorium at a reasonable rate). Since most on line are saying
'get rid of the center, its not mandated by state law!' the
voice of the cultural community is needed to cast more light,
than heat, on the issue.
So I guess if we can have people arguing the pros and cons of
county programs for ugly child abuse, and jail cells, and how
much or whether people should pay to hear Mozart or watch
Sleeping Beauty in the cultural center, we must be reaching a
representative spectrum of voters.
In a *very* quick glance at Chris Arterton's book
"Teledemocracy" (you know, jump to the index to see if your
favorite topic is there - computer conferencing, then read it
while driving home) I see the same set of assumptions everyone
has when speaking of the use of computer communications and
political discussion. That he seems to be considering only
those who can *directly* go online. And he discussed Source,
EIES, Delphi and a few others. Not a mention of a grass roots
BBS that I can see, which is too bad, because he cites the
economics of online services as a big deterrent to their use in
political democracy. I think he, as other, simply greatly
underestimate the number and variety of devices - few of which
will be called 'computers' - which everyone will be using. And
already are - such as touch tone surveys, some with instant
feedback to radio and tv figures online, who can, before the
porgram is over, discuss the response.
In any event, since some of you on here seem to think this
discussion rather enlightening, any objections to my printing
it out and sending it to Chris?
[continued]
ENA NETWEAVER Volume 3, Number 11, Article 6 November 1987
Electronic Democracy
Part IV
by Dave Hughes
September 27
============
We will have Electronic Democracies when terminals are popular
in Washeterias! And when 'get out the vote' groups drop off
terminals all over town.
Since I have to read Arterton in bits and snatches I will
report in bits and snatches. Only computer-telecom permit
incremental book reports! Chris makes one very important
decision at the outset of his book. While most who talk of
electronic democracy see the end of our current forms of
'representative' governmnet, he thinks that whatever changes
are made will only affect that form, not replace it with some
form of populism! Good for him. Only place I differ is I think
that the 'representatives' may themsleves be in control of some
media. Like sysops. "Vote for XXXX. He will make a great Sysop
while in Congress!"
October 4
=========
I just got a copy of Sept 29th, Wall Street Journal where Bob
Davis writes an article on 'Hobbyists as Lobbyists" Computer
Users Are Mobilized to Support Host of Causes".
Reports on the staggering response to the FCC $5 access charge
ruling, and other uses of networks for 'tele-politics.' Also
mentions the use by Peace Net, National Association of
Manufacturers, Bruce Babbitt, and even my own City Councilman
Wayne Fisher "In Colorado Springs, Colo Wayne Fisher says his
underdog candidacy for city council took off when he posted his
platform of local electronic bulletin boards and answered
comments from voters electronically." (I am pleased he is
willing to view it that strongly - since I referred the WSJ to
him when they called me. And one never knows how an office
holder views the relative significance of electronic democracy.
End of the article is interesting:
Predicts Roger Craver, a political fundraiser and computer
enthusiast, "In five years, information utilities will be the
conventional means of communications for organizing and
political advocacy."
Next Chapter of the County Budget Saga. After some rapid
exchanges online, the Budget Committee and I caught a
television station in a flim-flam! And got it reversed. The
station that runs editorials and invites rebutals gave the
Citizen's Committee and its work a hot blast. I requested a
chance to rebut. Even sent in my 60 seconds of text. Which
invited them - as well as the public - to dial into the online
discussions to get the *real* story, from the actors
themselves, and not just the press. They choked on it. ALthough
the FCC requires TV stations to respond to such requests an
mine in 72 hours, they tried an end run and called a 'safe'
committee member, *inviting}i* him to give an editorial on the
air. Didn't tell him that there had been a hot blast by them at
his Committee *or* that they had a prior request for a
rebuttal. He took them at their word.
Said he would call back and give them an answer. He checked
with another committee member who was online in the county flap
on Chariot and saw where I said I had asked for rebutal time.
So - in swift online electoronic time - we huddled, and the
member who was 'invited' to give an editorial called back the
TV station's editorial director and chewed her out for what he
viewed as an unethical journalistic act, said he wanted me to
give what I wanted to give.
So, caught in the act because online asynchrnous communications
let we the 'public' keep tabs on things better than we could
have otherwise, the TV station had to swallow hard, call me and
offer me air time I will tape the editorial tomorrow morning.
And even more people will dial in.
Hmm. Maybe electronic 'vigilance' will keep more than
government honest.
October 5
=========
Now things are *really* heating up! Many things broke today
almost too rapidly for me to keep up. While I was taping the
rebuttal inviting all to dial in), the Commissioners in a
set-up deal tried to further discredit the committee's work by
dissolving it, letting the staff 'rebut' some of its more way
out recommendations (while remaining silent on many unanswered
questions of far greater moment.)
The press, of course, dutifully reported on it on the 5 o'clock
news. Twill be in the papers tomorrow. My rebuttal will run
tomorrow evening - in which I call for the Committees work to
be a beginning, not an end, to the review of the County review
of operations. I will follow it up with a letter to the local
editor, being even more specific. I will also write the
Chairwoman of the County and request - on a floppy disk - the
staff rebuttal of the original report. Which I will dutifully
put on line, paragraph by paragraph paired off with the
original entries. (I have already uploaded my 60 second
editorial rebuttal to the original tv editorial which was taped
and transcribed by a committee member).
Of course in all this, I keep making the message - come on line
and deal with the facts, the copies of the laws, the display of
budgets, as well as the opinions as to what they mean.
Television images fade, newspapers are thrown out, radio talk
is forgotton. The online record remains...just a modem dial
away...right through the next election.
October 6
=========
Proof that it is getting serious. Call from a Commissioner "Ok
now, talk me through the log on procedure again so I can see
that discussion..."
Even the candidates privately deplore the necessity of
trivializing their campaigns by making everything fit the 10
second television-rejoinder length. Ultimately self defeating
for the whole political process.
And also to the point of the ability of the candidate
organizing the debate around his or her own media - electronic
- I spent an interesting hour at the County Courthouse today.
Went there to pick up a copy of the 24 page staff 'rebuttal' to
the 24 page Budget Committee report in order to put *it*
online, juxtaposed against the committee recommendations.
I knew something ws up when 3 of the 5 commissioners, and the
county administrator came into the one commissioners office
where I went, and launched into an *extended* discussion of
what they had read 'online' and even barking at me for things I
had said there. (It became immediately apparent that they were
printing out *everything* and passing it around the county
offices.) Everytime one of them started making an eloquent
defense of their views and attacked something said online, I
said "Put it online! Speak for yourself there - so that the
PUBLIC can learn from the dialogue. I am not a Reporter."
Passions are running high on this one. Since comments I have
made in the conference are being attacked by BOTH county
officials AND committee members I must be doing something right.
It is clear they got the point - if you want the discussion of
your operations carried out to the point of resolution,
consensus, or 'agree to disagree' (and then vote) then go
online and say all you have to say. Everyone gets heard. In
detail. On the issues, facts, authorities.
So I said "Say, can you give me this 24 pages on a floppy
disk?" Everybody scrambled and in 15 minutes the County
Administrator rushed in with a floppy disk. (I didn't have the
heart to tell them they gave me a Dec Displaywriter formatted
disk - which I can't easily read in ascci off an MSDOS machine,
but I will solve that, and teach em what ascii is.) So now they
get *their* views out, in full text. After going on the 5:30
news in a 60 second editorial-rebuttal - in which I said
"Fortunatley technology permits us to be discussing these
matters on computer bulletin-boards all over town" - I got
calls asking for the modem number. And the Committee member who
did one depth analysis - which was boiled down to a one
paragraph recomendation in the report, now wants to upload his
sub-committee report where all the justifying meat is.
While the County Commissioners 'fired' the Budget Committee
yesterday, the debate over the budget has just begun. And I had
to restrain myself from smiling when I saw that the elected
county officials are taking this *very* seriously. And now know
they are wlecome - yeah expected - to participate, if they want
their viewpoints to get as full an airing as that of the
critical public.
October 7
=========
Beautiful, proper use of this medium in the controversy today.
Dr. Muth, in response to a question about the County Health
Budget and how it compares with other Counties in Colorado,
took the time to prepare, and upload two *tables* comparing 10
counties on a per capita, percentage, and absolute basis. Shows
his Department is quite economical. Also displayed the average
salary for his professionals. Now is getting remarks like 'Your
staff is underpaid" etc. Complete turnabout in the initial 'cut
our taxes' attitude.
Ugly, improper use of the medium -- I was at an affair tonight
where the Governor attended, thus drew a pretty politically
savy crowd. Woman came up to me and said "I hear that
Commissioner Meier is dialing up a bulletin board in town and
slandering the County Clerk and Recorder" I said "I am sure it
is my BBS he is dialing up, but he hasn't make a single comment
about the Clerk and recorder. She said, well the Clerk has her
Lawyer reading it so she can sue for slander.
Ha! Next thing we will all be in court trying to get a Judge to
log on.....
But the *real* point came out. She said "His own Party
(Republican) is going to take care of him for that." I
retorted "You had better dial in and read for yourself what is
being said, rather than listen to rumors." She said "I think I
will. We now have a modem." Glad to have her -she is the
Chairwoman of the Planning Commission! Another agency online!
---------
Author's note: This discussion is still continuing hot and heavy
and chances are it will be of significant interest in this election
year.
ENA NETWEAVER Volume 3, Number 11, Article 7 November 1987
Electronic Democracy - Comments
by Don Strauss
[note: Don wrote a series of comments in response to material
in a discussion on "electronic democracy" which included Dave
Hughes (see his remarks in the October and November issues of
NETWEAVER) and others. Don was good enough to give us
permission to reprint them here.]
I have now read through all of the comments in DCMETA 121 and
153 on "Electronic Democracy." It is every bit as exciting as
you claimed and I am very grateful to you for [helping me to
get it] Now, as promised, here are some observations:
*-*-*-*-*-*-*
General: This is the best account of electonically assisted
participatory democracy that I have seen. I wonder how many
(if any) other examples there are. What a great service it
would be to indentify all of the current on-going examples, and
to link them up so that they could exchange experiences and
brain storm improved strategies. If this were ever done, I
would sure like to be a participant/lurker.
Qubes: I have recently spoken with top officials of both Qube
and the New York Times (the Times now owns interactive-TV
capability in several communities in southern New Jersey). From
what they told me, I think that Dave Hughes' analysis of their
failure in participatory democracy is quite accurate. In
addition, both of my sources told me that they were also afraid
of pushing it further for fear of being accused of trying to
influence public policy through a medium that is now considered
elitist. For this reason, both corporations have decided not
to push political use, but rather to extend interactive-TV use
for commercial purposes. If it becomes generally accepted
there, then they may try to reenter the political field. I
conclude from this that the idea of participatory democracy can
and will only be promoted by individuals like Hughes, not by
the large commercial networks or other conventional media.
Anonymity: I was interested in the many comments on this
subject. It is indeed a complicated one. Our democratic
"culture" stresses the secret ballot. On the other hand,
Hughes and Lisa Carlson (among others) tell us from experience
that anonymity on-line seems to degenerate the quality of
discussion. As usual, Lisa strikes a constructive note when
she suggests that a variety of techniques should be tried
depending upon the circumstances and the purposes of the
discussion. "Real" names should probably be used for problem
solving, with perhaps a monitored and edited anonymous account
(to edit out irresponsible ad-hominem attacks) for those who
want to test new ideas without attribution. But there must
always be provisions for secret voting.
Lobbying and Collaborating: I was particularly interested in
the discussion introduced by Art Kleiner on lobbying,
representative government, and collaborative problem solving.
He viewed Hughes' activities as primarily adversarial
lobbying. My own impression is slightly different. It seemed
to me that Hughes genuinely tried to get different viewpoints
and to promote unbiased education. However, he is a
self-declared activist, and Kleiner raises an important issue.
Ideally, all viewpoints and all citizens should be committed to
collaborative procedures and behavior in a joint effort to
reach consensus, accommodation, and a decision based upon the
best available information. Yet, pragmatically, our democracy
is adversarial, reflecting accurately our culture. As we
continue to experiment, again drawing upon Lisa's wisdom, we
need to recognize the various potential uses of electronic
conferencing; among them being:
* Lobbying, single-issue activism: Groups with a special
point of view and interests will always join together to
increase their strength through numbers, to refine arguments,
and to promote as best they can their favored solutions.
* Representative groups: These will pursue the adversarial
methods that dominate our society, but will follow conventional
order and due process in their debates.
* Collaborative problem solving groups: This relatively new
concept for reaching decisions are composed of individuals who
assemble to solve a defined and recognized problem, seeking
first to understand the issues before "leaping to conclusions".
The objective is to invent better solutions, not to push an
already reached conclusion.
Each of the above conference configurations has its own
"validity". The important thing, it seems to me, is to have
them clearly labelled, and not to permit, for example, a
lobbying group to masquerade as a collaborative one. Again,
ideally, each new issue requiring a democratic decision should
at least begin with the collaborative configuration. Then, as
the issues become better understood, different groups might
coalesce and appoint representatives to defend their interests.
Finally, as the time for a vote/decision approaches, open
lobbying will surely be demanded and practiced. But if such
adversarial behavior and processes follow a collaborative
attempt to understand, then the quality of the debate should be
of "higher quality", and so should the ultimate decision. It
seems to me that some such goals might be adopted by those of
us seeking to develop this medium. Each of the above different
kinds of electronic conferencing would require different
procedures, different styles of moderating, and different rules
for admitting participants. Many other kinds of conferencing
will surely be developed with further experience and
experimentation.
How many and who: Should electronic conferencing be for the
decision- makers alone, for all who are willing to participate,
or for the whole electorate? These are fundamental
questions. Dave Hughes' experiments began with numbers with
which we are all familiar --- usually well under 50. But as
his "constituency" increased, the numbers grew rapidly and, by
the end, they reached over 300 and are still growing. How many
can this medium accommodate and still retain a high quality of
participation? What procedures can we invent to accommodate
the ultimate thousands, even millions, that must be the goal of
genuine partticipatory democracy?
I have no quick answers, but I suggest that they surely must be
found in the creative use of Hughes' notion of "multi-modes" -
a mixture of many different media and procedures. Eventually,
a combination of TV and computer conferencing must be
introduced.
Apathy and participation: Throughout the comments in DCMETA
121, the problem of citizen apathy was reaised. Hughes' energy
and ingenuity first galvanized a small number of individuals in
a small community, but this kind of leadership is surely much
more difficult to pursue in larger cities, and certainly
nationally.
Elsewhere I have speculated on the use of a "drafted
electorate", calling upon the precedence of the more familiar
procedure of drafting citizens for jury duty. If you wish, and
still have patience after reading all of this, I could download
an article of several pages which I have titled A DEMOCRATIC
FANTASY. In it I describe a specific decision reached in the
year 2087. Five percent of the eligible electorate are drafted
into a "citizens' decision- making corps". Their employers are
directed to give them one day a week release time for this
citizen duty. They are then involved in a combination of F-T-F
and electronic conferencing until they, some 12 months later,
have worked their way through a compex issue to a concensus
decision.
Well, I can dream, can't I?
------
Author's note: Don Strauss is President Emeritus of the American
Arbitration Institute and has rich experience working in the
area of conflict resolution and participatory democratic
processes.
MEMBERSHIP FORM
On April 14, 1985, at the closing of
The First Intersystem Electronic Networking Symposium,
a new organization came into being:
the Electronic Networking Association.
The purpose of this association is
to promote electronic networking in ways that
ENRICH individuals
ENHANCE organizations
and BUILD global communities.
You are invited to become a member.
Please complete (download) the form below and _mail_ to:
Ed Yarrish, Treasurer
Electronic Networking Association
c/o Executive Technology Associates, Inc.
2744 Washington Street
Allentown, PA 18104
Enclose a check or money order made payable to the Electronic
Networking Association.
Be sure to include your network affiliations and online
addresses so that you can be informed of the location of
NETWEAVER and ENA activities on _your_ system.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
ENA Membership Form
NAME: _________________________________________________
ORGANIZATION: _________________________________________________
ADDRESS: _________________________________________________
_________________________________________________
NETWORKS _________________________________________________
AND
BULLETIN _________________________________________________
BOARDS
(INCLUDE _________________________________________________
IDS, IF
NECESSARY) _________________________________________________
Amount Enclosed: _____________ ($50 - Professional membership
$20 - General membership)
Is this a new membership? _________
Net or BBS where you received this form: _____________________
Welcome!
--
Patt Haring UUCP: ..cmcl2!phri!dasys1!patth
Big Electric Cat Compu$erve: 76566,2510
New York, NY, USA MCI Mail: 306-1255; GEnie: PHaring
(212) 879-9031 FidoNet Mail: 1:107/701 or 107/222Doug_Thompson@watmath.waterloo.edu (12/16/87)
Re: NetWeaver, Volume 3, Number 11
Alas, the contents page of the recently posted NETWEAVER lists 38,498 bytes
of data, which does not include the header and contents info itself. Alas??
Alas because some news readers, inlcuding mine, choke at 16K. Actually mine
chokes at about 15.5Kb.
(sigh)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ISIS: International Student Information Service 519-747-1332 2400/N/8/1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fido 1:221/162 -- 1:221/0 280 Phillip St.,
UUCP: !watmath!fido!221!162!Doug_Thompson Unit B-3-11
!watmath!orchid!imprint Waterloo, Ontario
Bitnet: fido@water Canada N2L 3X1
Internet: dt@221.162.fido.waterloo.edu (519) 746-5022
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ISIS is a non-profit agency dedicated to international communication
------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
* Origin: * ISIS INTERNATIONAL (221/162)