Help with Idea / Democratic Party - Internet - New Technology

[Alan Silverman]

Birgitt, Mike,
Thank you so much.

Are there any editors or writers out there, who can help me write an
absolutely clear brilliant essay/letter?  Or perhaps you know someone
else to refer me to?

Thanks again,
Al



Birgitt Williams wrote:
>
> Alan,
> Whatever you do with this is worth a pursuing because it is clear you have
> passion to move this forward. I found that the last few paragraphs of what
> you wrote was exactly what we say OST does. I get excited about any work
> that I am aware of in which someone is assisting others to find their voice,
> their truth, their freedom, their right to make choices-all of which is so
> very much needed because people generally have lost touch with all of this
> and lost touch with their personal power. Bless you for pursuing this,
> Birgitt
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: OSLIST [mailto:OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU]On Behalf Of Alan
> Silverman
> Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2003 10:58 AM
> To: OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU
> Subject: Re: Help with Idea / Democratic Party - Internet - New Technology
>
> Dear Christine, Birgitt, Jim, BJ, Michael,
>
> Thank you for your responses.
>
> I guess my idea has always been to create a type of virtual Open Space.
> Virtual, because of my experience at IBM. Commuting hours a day to do
> the same work I could do at home seemed so foolish. (I was in software
> support.)
>
> Having to physically travel to a specific place to participate in a
> process, this immediately cuts out almost everyone - the disabled, the
> poor, the dying, 99.9% of all of us,  from participation.  Which serves
> the individuals who control powerful institutions.  I want a virtual
> Washington D.C., a virtual UN.  I think it can be done, with specific
> technologies.
>
> I appreciate your responses.  But I feel some were really saying:  "Do
> this instead".  Or "No, that can't be done".  These are valid responses,
> but should be said with a full understanding of what I'm saying.
> Harrison came closest to understanding, but I had to clarify a key
> point:  Convincing the Democratic Party is not necessary for the idea to
> work.
>
> "Is this what you mean?" ...  "Or is it this?" ... "This might be a better
> way...."
> The role of listener, understander, interpreter for other's ideas is
> very important.
>
> A few more things, before I go into my letter.  First, key to my system
> of thought is trying to imagine all the ways something might possibly
> work, before saying it won't.  Second, although I do have the writer's
> horror of  having my ideas stolen, I also have a rather loose sense of
> ownership.  I'm not saying 'help me with my idea' so much as 'take it,
> work with it, make it your own, whatever part, as much or little, as you
> want."  Third, content is important to me, not form.  If you can say it
> better, then say it.  Take what I write, move it, slice it, dice it.
> That's the beauty of software.  Fourth, it doesn't matter who you are or
> where you come from.  Christine from Australia, if you understand what
> I'm saying and can help create it, do so.  Anything, just referring an
> idea to someone else, can help.  Think down the line.
>
> Now I'm being wordy. I don't want to be wordy.  I want to boil things
> down to their essence, else the core objective be lost.
>
> 1. My goal is to create and legitimize a virtual institution where
> everyone can input their ideas and join to create solutions, not fuzzy
> solutions but very specific well thought out solutions, to specific
> problems.  I believe the technology now exists to accomplish this.
>
> 2. I believe that at this specific time, right now, if we can find the
> right words to express this, and find the right people to champion the
> idea, and place those words in the right place, we have a decent chance
> of creating such an institution.  This is worth trying.
>
> I'm going to throw down my words, like characters on a Ouija board,
> hoping they take shape and become something.  Don't be too respectful
> of  specific words.  They are just words, after all.
>
> Thank you.
> Alan
>
> Letter I began to write:
>
> Over the past few years I have created innovative solutions for the
> Democratic Party, concise well articulated plans with a high degree of
> granularity, intended to address specific problems. Since I worked as a
> software engineer at IBM, many of these ideas dealt with the Internet
> and new technologies, areas where I felt the Democratic Party could use
> assistance.
>
> At different times I presented these ideas in softcopy, hardcopy and in
> person, to various arms of the DNC and individuals within the party, to
> committees and liberal think tanks, and our elected officials.  Because
> these were good ideas well presented, they were discussed, sometimes at
> length, before each idea finally disappeared, swallowed up by that great
> confused institution, the Democratic Party.
>
> There is no lack of good ideas in America.  We have a wealth of
> intelligent creative individuals.  But no mechanism exists to gather
> innovative ideas, refine them into concrete solutions, and then feed
> those solutions to the Democratic leadership for implementation.  If it
> did exist, such a mechanism would invigorate the Democratic Party and
> the American political system as a whole.
>
> The problem is finding a process to efficiently gather and sort ideas,
> winnow out good from bad, and then  create solutions.  This is the type
> of problem I began working on at IBM in 1988, also the first year I
> worked on the Internet.
>
> The Internet is another great confused institution, implicitly
> democratic, offering enormous possibilities,  but containing too much
> information too easily created, and only with difficulty appraised.  The
> difference between this and the problems we faced at IBM are more of
> scope than of kind.
>
> The solution lay within a matrix of four technological groups:
>
> 1. The Internet, search engines, sorting programs, heuristics.
> 2. Huge data bases, cheap data storage, data mining.
> 3. Digital signatures, encryption programs.
> 4. Moderated forums.
>
> With these technologies we can build a forum where groups of individuals
> can create intelligent solutions to better our party, our nation, and
> our world.  This open forum, open to anyone with access to the Internet,
> open in the fact that the discussions, this solution manufacturing
> process, would be in plain view, thus mitigating against the back room
> deals that often dominate politics.
>
> The forums would be moderated and structured, not free form. Each
> discussion would constitute communities of individuals most
> knowledgeable in specific areas and most passionate about specific
> problems, joining together from wherever they live, to break complex
> problems into simple ones, attacking these simple problems in parallel.
>
> Get the very best people, no matter where they live and who they are,
> working together. Ultimately these are the people who should create
> actual policy and suggest solutions.  The Democratic Party is the right
> group to sponsor such a forum and champion its solutions.  This may be
> the only way we can compete with the Republican Party, which has more
> money and better organization than we.
>
> (Al:   OK, this is where it peters out.
>
> Question:
>
> Is it too pedantic, stiff, self-important?  Does it matter I was at
> IBM?  Does this technological connection lend some credence? Mention
> Google somewhere?  Hot item now. When Google made it to the cover of
> Newsweek magazine, I thought, 'of course, if Google can cull 3 billion
> web pages and organize them to give you the web pages you want, we can
> do the same, matching idea and people together.'
>
> But I don't want to just give Google the 'contract'.  It is most
> efficient to find things which already exist, people who have already
> plotted out implementations to an idea.  They are out there, for
> virtually any idea or concept, quickly plugged into specific tasks.  But
> at every level, task... the  actual implementation must be left to the
> best possible solution in competition with all other like solutions.
> The best as judged by ones peers, those individuals most knowledgeable
> about that specific area.  BJ, I think this is your distinction between
> 'citizen democracy' and 'direct democracy'.)
>
> Further wisps, some dealing with actual implementation, which needn't be
> in the letter:
>
> The problem with "innovation" in business movements of the 1990's, came
> from three facts.  1. An idea created by one individual could be easily
> stolen by  others.  2. Innovative ideas were submitted through a
> hierarchy of management people not capable of understanding or adding to
> the idea, and usually hostile to new ideas in general, since new ways of
> doing things endanger their own positions.   3.  With software it's so
> easy to generate ideas, most of them impractical.  Assessing, grading,
> and sorting them was simply too expensive.   Output generally didn't
> justify cost.
>
> Now, with the availability of digital signatures, dependable encryption
> programs, and cheap data storage, literally every discussion could be
> documented and archived in total.  There would be no debate who first
> came up with a suggestion and whose input was critical to its final
> form.   But the great weight of output could also be inexpensively
> sorted and grouped.
>
> This would represent both democracy and capitalism at its very best.
> Protocols would be developed to view ideas and refine them efficiently.
> Heuristic searching, sorting, and summarizing programs make this
> possible.
>
> >From a country of 270 million, or a world of 6 billion, there is almost
> always someone who really sees what's going on. The problem is finding
> that person and helping them refine that idea into a solution.
>
> For instance, it seems apparent that an FBI agent in Phoenix and others
> in Minnesota were on the track of the 911 terrorists. Undoubtedly many
> other  individuals in other branches of the U.S. government also knew
> something was up.  But hierarchical institutions and organizations, such
> as the FBI, and the Republican Party, are not good at finding this type
> of person and putting her/him together with other people individuals who
> can reasonably assess the value of their ideas, so they may begin to
> work together to create solutions. Perhaps more accurately, these
> institutions are not good at allowing such people to find each other and
> work together.
>
> (too preachy and self-involved? I think so.  But the 911 stuff could
> touch a nerve.)
>
> The immediate question at hand is 'what should the Democratic Party do
> in light of successful Republican strategy?" That's the button to push,
> the hook. Do we push it accusingly, saying they've failed the Democratic
> electorate?  Helpfully? as a challenge? I don't know.
>
> In the long run, I think one of the most important things the Democratic
> Party could offer in competition with the Republicans, is giving all
> (frustrated creative) people the chance to have their ideas seen and
> used.  But to give you an idea what I'm thinking, following are specific
> examples of the uses of such forums...
>
> (*** Important aside:  The above two paragraphs will be the last time
> you hear me say:
>  "I don't know"...
> "But to give you an idea what I'm thinking"...
> "I think..."
> If you do see these statements, please delete them from my writing.
>
> I'm not a great believer in certainty.  "I think", "I believe", "I don't
> know for sure" are implied in my every statement.  But saying so makes
> for  impossible reading.)
>
> Forum examples:
>
> 1. Suppose there is need for a  policy decision concerning how farmers
> should irrigate fields in the mountains of Peru.  I give this example
> because I remember reading something about this in a back issue of
> Natural History magazine.
>
> I'm willing to bet there are at least three dozen people who know more
> about these fields, farmers, and land use than anyone else in the world,
> all the implications, connections, and complications.  If a U.S. policy
> decision were ever needed concerning this (I leave it to your
> imagination why there might be need for such a decision), these are the
> people who should make it, or at least be party to making it.
>
> This may seem inconsequential, but great disasters come from seemingly
> inconsequential decisions. The complexity and size of our world leaves
> open the opportunity for individuals and groups to secretly push their
> own agendas, to the detriment of all. Computer data bases have an
> unparalleled ability to model reality, to track the exact status, in
> real time, of things which might otherwise fall between the cracks.
>
> 2.  At least 50 people in the world today have thought of the idea which
> I am discussing here, all aspects, from the technologies involved to the
> structures of forums and rules and protocols to governing them.
> Together we could quickly refine the idea, break it down into
> constituent parts, then  solve these as separate problems.
>
> When I was working at IBM there was always someone somewhere who 'knew'.
> Of course you could figure out what they knew, but that might take days.
> But if instead you found that person, and got the answer, the tiny bit
> of information necessary to send the project forward, it might take her
> or him only a minute.
>
> Because I thought of certain ideas, it doesn't mean I'm the best person
> to organize them into an essay, write them down, etc.  I want to own
> those ideas and get credit for them.  But I don't want to 'own' the
> whole.  I want to give ownership away, to all the people who best know
> how to accomplish what should be accomplished, with each person getting
> credit for the actual value of their input.
>
> Any project can be broken down into segments.  This project:
> 1. Base ideas
> 2. Write essay
> 3. Round up prominent support
> 4. Place in prominent venue.
>
> Each is the basis for miniforums.
>
> What it comes down to is that already all the right answers are out
> there somewhere.  All we must do is find them, create a forum for the
> people who understand them, then use them, while crediting all those who
> deserve credit for a solution.  This will constitute a great worldwide
> institution.  The key is to legitimize the institution and the solutions
> it proposes.
>
> The people who should pose solutions are the community of all
> individuals in the world most knowledgeable in certain specific areas
> and most passionate about shared ideas.
>
> *
> *
> ==========================================================
> OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU
> ------------------------------
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options,
> view the archives of oslist at listserv.boisestate.edu,
> Visit:
>
> http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html

*
*
==========================================================
OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU
------------------------------
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options,
view the archives of oslist at listserv.boisestate.edu,
Visit:

http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html