[Campaigns-l] List Purpose

[Stephen Abbott]

To be fair, I sympathize with your confusion as to purpose, especially since
it was very broadly defined and the purpose of both the wiki and the list
was, and remains, unclear to many. This apparently was done on purpose,
because the founder is afraid that setting *any* guidelines - even simply
explaining what the site is for, and what it's not for - will somehow stifle
conversation. Obviously that's not the case, but it's the wrong
conversation, and I think failing to be clear is always a mistake.

The wiki can go in innumerable directions, but the two major ones seem to
be:
1) A full-on debate over abortion, gay rights, the environment, affirmative
action, drug legalization, the Iraq War, and many more, which simply allows
a forum for angry, partisan rhetoric;  and
2) A place where the ELECTORAL PROCESS is discussed, irregardless of the
participants' belief systems, pet issues or reasons why their views on how
the nation's issues should be decided are the right ones.

That process could (and should) very well include the issue you raise -
voter fraud. However, if it's being introduced as a new way to re-fight the
last two elections, and make angry accusations against an oppositing party
or candidate, then that's category 1, above, and horribly destructive (and
again, is done elsewhere, ad nauseum.) It's also not necessary to spell out
the party's stands on all the issues in order to debate process. We all know
where they stand. There would be no 'vacuum' here if those articles didn't
exist.

But if the topic is introduced as: "Let's discuss ways to eliminate voter
fraud," and it acutally solicits some new, innovative and creative ideas to
do so, then that's incredibly positive and will be a reason why a political
leader or political operative would visit this site - and that (I think) is
the site's goal, or one of them.

I'm willing to listen to ANYONE, regardless of their Right/Left views on the
ISSUES, if they are open to finding common ground on how to improve the
PROCESS of electing our leaders, irrespective of their stands on the issues.

That includes (among many other topics): voter fraud, campaign finance, term
limits, new ways to draw electoral districts, negative campaigning, access
to media, innovative ideas for using the Internet in campaigns, etc.

A section entirely separate from the "issues" section on the main page
should be devoted to ONLY process issues like this.

Stephen A.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Slije" <slije at comcast.net>
To: <campaigns-l at wikia.com>
Sent: Friday, July 14, 2006 12:06 PM
Subject: [Campaigns-l] List Purpose


> I came to Campaigns Wikia because I saw a reference to it on a blog.  I
had no
> previous experience with Wikia.  It said the founder of Wikia had added a
new
> project for political campaigns which aimed to reinvent the wheel, so to
> speak.  I followed the link to the main site, where I was told to join the
> mailing list for "news and updates and support".  I see it also says "We
are
> not here to debate political issues per se, we are here to work for better
> politics all around."  I'm not sure if that has been modified since I
signed
> up - it sounds new - but based on the mission statement that was pretty
much
> my understanding.  I did not come here to debate political issues - there
are
> plenty of others places for that.
>
> However, notice that "work for better politics all around" is a VERY broad
> definition of purpose, and I understood this to be deliberate.  However,
some
> of the people here, particularly people who appear to have been involved
with
> Wikia for some time and used the mailing lists for specific tech issues,
seem
> to think the purpose is much more narrowly defined.  In the latest
example,
> Chad writes:
>
> > This specific mailing list was set up to talk about political
> > infrastructure, irrespective of partisanship, irrespective of country,
and
> > not specifically focused on the subject of political debate except
inasmuch
> > as the debate is influenced by the design of that infrastructure.
>
> Yet earlier he wrote:
>
> > There's always a difficulty in understanding the appropriate use of
mailing
> > lists, blogs, wiki pages, etc.  This list is to help coordinate the
efforts
> > of the Wikia build.
>
> That is a much more extremely narrow focus, but it is one that others such
as
> Jimmy Wales have echoed:
>
> > stay focussed on meta-discussion of how to build our project,
> > what the project's goals should be, how to achieve those goals, etc.
>
> Okay, "our project".  Yet in the mission statement it says:
>
> > This website, Campaigns Wikia, has the goal of bringing together people
> > from diverse political perspectives who may not share much else, but who
> > share the idea that they would rather see democratic politics be about
> > engaging with the serious ideas of intelligent opponents, about
activating
> > and motivating ordinary people to get involved and really care about
> > politics beyond the television soundbites.
>
> The first thing suggested is:
>
> > First, sign up for the mailing list. Let's start a conversation, let's
> > start teaching each other how to reach out and get the attention of the
> > campaigns.
>
> I realize how these all fit together, but we're all over the map here.  If
> you've had spam and debate problems on this list before I joined, I think
one
> of the reasons is that you're inviting the general public into an
ill-defined
> forum.  Everyone is going to understand this differently, from the
> wikipedians who appear to be used to using these lists for specific tech
> issues, to people like myself who are more interested in "working for
better
> politics all around", including through application of technologies such
as
> Wikia.
>
> Which is it?
>
> I have no wish to debate every political issue here, but I think trying to
> develop the technology in a vacuum without the political issues is not
> realistic.  Also, some of the very issues of 'how to make politics work'
and
> how to use technology, are themselves hot political issues.  If Wikians
are
> going to get into politics, expect to get your hands dirty. This process
is
> not going to be as clean as putting up a wiki on "the origins of table
salt".
> People get a little more heated in politics, more desperate - by
definition
> it touches the most challenging aspects of life.  If you can't take the
heat,
> get out of the kitchen.  There are people watching children get blown to
> pieces in a war right this minute over human disagreements which are
> addressed in politics.  This is not encyclopedia editing.  This is the
real
> thing.  And if you think you're going to work with it, and provide any
> constructive addition to it, without feeling the heat you are deluding
> yourself.  In fact, the more effective you are, the more heat you're going
to
> feel.  If you do manage to bring greater power to the people through more
> participation, you're going to be stepping on some powerful toes.  You
might
> want to consider that at the beginning.
>
> I am not suggesting this turn into a political issue debate forum in
general.
> Yet as I said, the technology of politics is one of the hottest political
> issues of our time.  For example, election fraud and govt secrecy.  If you
> can't discuss current news and insights on this, its evidence, and how it
> relates to "working for better politics all around" without getting bent
out
> of shape and screaming "off topic!!!", nothing of purpose is going to be
> accomplished here.  You're just going to create another crippled,
unrealistic
> system that doesn't address the core issues facing the current system.
>
> As for list volume, if you don't want to receive a lot of email, don't
join a
> mailing list.  Yes, it is important to stay on topic.  But if you're doing
> what the mission statement says, brainstorming and creating, things are
going
> to get messy.  The messier the better - that's how ideas develop.  If
you're
> gonna cook, you've gotta make some sparks.  Learn how to use the tools.
> Create a folder in your email program to catch all the list mail and
filter
> it as you please.  Trying to shut people up over the slightest variations
in
> content is not conducive to creative development.  That may work for table
> salt, but it's not going to work in politics, as you're finding out.
People
> are going to have agendas, and they're going to use every device they can
> think of.
>
> Dissent, bias, and censorship, as well as the issue of spamming (jamming
> communication networks), are some of the key issues effecting politics
right
> now.  If you can't face them on the mailing list, how are you going to
deal
> with them on the larger system you're attempting to design?  These are
core
> design issues.  Don't throw the baby out with the bath water.  Getting rid
of
> the "problem" is not your goal.  Addressing it is.
>
> IMO, a forum which is unbiased does not mean neutral or moderate.
Moderate
> and neutral are themselves political biases, points on the political
> spectrum, no more or less valid than extreme left and extreme right.  I
think
> the key to having an unbiased forum is not trying to make everyone into a
> moderate or a politically neutral person - ain't gonna happen.  The key is
> tolerance.  Allow others to express their views without a) attacking their
> position using personal attacks, b) trying to stop the flow of
information,
> and c) seeking to allow only one set of views to be acceptable on the
list.
> Develop a thick skin for political issues, and a respect for people who do
> not share your views.  That is what will work, not censorship and unequal
> application of rules such as "off-topic".  Obviously, it is important to
stay
> on-topic overall, but to a great extent that has to come through tolerance
> and patience.  Even if you think things are getting too far off track,
bring
> them back by weaving the current discussion into our larger purpose for
being
> here - there will always be a connection.  (This is a positive, creative
> control system that leads, as opposed to a negative, reactive control
system
> that tries to put out fires.)
>
> The whole reason the internet is a powerful tool in politics is precisely
> because it is inclusive.  If you think narrowing the focus is some new
tool
> you've just invented, guess again.  Narrowing the focus is exactly the
hole
> traditional politics has fallen into, and inclusion is exactly what this
> project aims for.
>
> Loosen up, Campaigns Wikia.  And welcome to politics.
>
> Slije
> _______________________________________________
> Campaigns-l mailing list
> Campaigns-l at wikia.com
> http://lists.wikia.com/mailman/listinfo/campaigns-l
>