> Has there been a concious effort to get certain voices involved or > is > everything open to whomever signs on? Both? Should there be an effort > to gain certain voices and if so, how is it established which ones and > who should try and fetch them?
15 years of experience with listserves and Bulletin Boards has taught me that such forums tend to have a life of their own. People who are normally silent and invisible suddenly become well known for their posts. Likewise, those who might normally be well known fall silent. Of course, there is a continuum of behaviors that are unique to listserves. As such, listserves tend to be self-regulating. First, a person must have computer access so the population of the list is automatically limited. Second, people make decisions on whether or not to post for reasons that are different from the reasons they would choose to speak. So you can bring people to the list, but that is no guarantee that they will benefit or participate. There will always be a complaint that the debate is elitist due to problems of access, the ability to post and to get your posts read - the delete button is all too easy to use on some people. It is a most effective weapon for silencing others. So, my philosophy is "those who are here are here." The debate that occurs must stand or fail on its own merits, not on a claim of being representative of the whole. We do not represent anyone but ourselves and as a group we represent no one, least of all the whole city. Leaders should listen to our debates as they would any other group of people. Anyone who thinks that we truly represent the continuum of thought in Minneapolis are mistaken. Robert Schmid Central _______________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
