A few random thoughts on this. I don't think one can really say that hack4dean has hashed this out, or that it is necessarily all that clear cut. Being a big fan of self organizing systems, it seems to me that what we have is a self organized system of hackers. Some part of the group is very eager to work with the campaign. Perhaps another part is as eager to work outside of the campaign, and probably a third group is somewhat indifferent.
Personally, I have one primary goal. That is to get Howard Dean elected President. I will do everything I can to make that happen. To the extent that involves working on some 'official' part of the campaign, I will do it. To the extent it involves throwing up webpages from my home site, hacking some code, putting a bumpersticker on my car, wearing a button, and handing out leaflets where ever I go, I will do that too. I hope that this is the attitude of most of the people here. That said, I also am a programmer, and a social scientist. I am eager to develop tools that will further the cause of democracy globally and to write about the social implication of such tools. I imagine most people here are eager to see tools that further the cause of democracy developed, and we will work on this as much as possible within the campaign, and continue to work on this beyond the campaign. I hope that this is reflects not only my thoughts, but the thoughts of others here as well. Aldon -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Zephyr Teachout Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2003 12:46 PM To: 'CMR'; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [hackers] Re: Legal Issues and dodo birds Hey CMR: I was under the (perhaps mis)apprehension that all this had been hashed out with the hackers, but it sounds like it may not have been. Of course it's a tough choice. You guys have two choices, really: (1) work w/the campaign (2) work outside the campaign We're not indifferent to what you decide to do -- the opposite, really (you are a complete godsend, and can transform the campaign) -- but completely respect whatever you decide upon. It is your choice. I see the main advantage of working with the campaign being, from a political point of view, that the work you are doing can not only win the presidency but transform politics. Because there is a driver behind it -- Dean -- it will grow exponentially. The main disadvantage is that HQ ultimately has to make final decisions on content, presentation, and legal issues. The legal issues come up throughout, because they are the hammer of the conservatives. The content and presentation come up as the project nears completion. The closer we work together, the easier it will be to take the project immediately into the public sphere. We at HQ are committed to building a kit that allows decentralized, bottom up creativity and communication. We want to build something that allows each Dean site to control its own content and still be connected to the movements of the campaign, official and unofficial. That kit, perversely, as the expression of the campaign's commitment, is extremely important -- in legal as well as message presentation. I REALLY REALLY hope you decide (or affirm, if it is already decided) to work with us. It will be very hard for us to do it another way. I believe, personally, that the functionality built here will take off and be used to transform politics altogether, but that Dean is the driving force that will allow it to happen -- and our coordination, and a close connection to the campaign, will be the synergy necessary to make it work. In my vision, Howard Dean will not just mention Meetups on the stump, but setting up Dean Community Sites. I really believe this is the next phase of the revolution -- and I'm sorry if you're feeling some of the constraints, but I hope you decide that they are worth it. Thanks so much, Z Zephyr Teachout Internet Organizing & Outreach Dean for America [EMAIL PROTECTED] Meetup at http://www.deanforamerica.com/meetup Get local at http://action.deanforamerica.com Contribute at http://www.deanforamerica.com/contribute -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of CMR Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2003 10:49 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [hackers] Re: Legal Issues and dodo birds > I talked to our lawyer again and he urged me STRONGLY to please ask you > guys not to deal with legal issues. This is different than Meetup hosts, > where people are looking for legal advice as independent groups, and not > coordinated with the campaign. Since we're working together, and > building a product the campaign will offer as a service, it is critical > that all legal decisions be made by Eric. > Observation time boys and girls: As this thread develops, I think it's becoming clear just what the difference is in becoming a movement "of Dean" as opposed to one "for Dean". I'm not passing judgment here, but just making the observation that ceding the independence of the project, and subsequently it's ultimate nature and function, comes at a "price".As do all choices. We've reached (and passed?) a crossroads here. Coordinating with Burlington in a evermore "intimate" manner way well be the optimal path to follow at this juncture, but that's a judgment call; anyone who says it's not, is being disingenuous. We (or some of us, in any case) have become "players" and that's a seductive experience indeed. But players often are required to play by someone else's rules. Nothing wrong with that, right? Got to have rules, after all. Thing is, I recall Zack's first posts regarding this "vision" on the coffeehouse list. He was carrying on about decentralized organic networks and reeds law and so forth... I could hear the eyes roll. But he got my attention because I see the cosmos as an "organic", adaptive, interconnected thing. A complex open self-organizing system so to speak. And the thing about open systems is that you start with some very simple ground rules and then you get out of the way. It'll make it's own rules from then on and if you try constrain it with boxes, or walls or straight lines it'll either overwhelm you or it'll die. But what it won't be is the same. My rather circuitous point here is simply that by choosing to directly link the project into the Dean organization, we lose some of that self-directed, self-sustaining, and, yes, self-organizing character; for better or ill. One of the initial threads-become-firestorm was about the true meaning of hacking, remember? I was first educated, then convinced, that the label meant something very important to many of those involved. Well, based on my recently corrected definition, we're now less about hacking and more about "suits". And perhaps that's in fact the best outcome we could ever have hoped for; perhaps not. I really don't know. I just know we've started down a new path here and it feels different. What I do know is that, given this linkage, if Dean isn't nominated the movement will be a different "animal" then if it had remained independent and it'll be standing around wondering what to do next. Will it be robust, generalized and adaptive enough to redefine itself, grow and prosper? Or will the constraints it "bought" by tying it's fortunes (and helm) to a (the?) man render it too "specialized" to morph and thus extinct? I don't know. I just read between the lines and thought I'd make an observation. Read it, delete it, advise me to take my medication... whatever. But think about it a bit, then put the shoulder once again to the wheel. Peace CMR <--enter gratuitous quotation that implies my profundity here-->
