This came across another list. It's on organization of projects. Parts of
it may apply to what we're doing.
Since it was posted to a public mailing list, I'll take it as
redistributable...I hope the author does not mind too much.
--- begin forwarded text
Received: from mx01.mrf.mail.rcn.net ([207.172.4.50])
by mta2.mail.erols.net (InterMail v03.02.07.03 118-128)
with ESMTP id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Mon, 1 Nov 1999 07:15:38 -0500
Received: from venus.imagiware.com ([205.254.196.78])
by mx01.mrf.mail.rcn.net with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #3)
id 11iGN8-00043z-00; Mon, 1 Nov 1999 07:15:38 -0500
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
by venus.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) id GAA18411
for lrt-list-outgoing; Mon, 1 Nov 1999 06:13:04 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: venus.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] using -f
Received: from smtp4.mindspring.com (smtp4.mindspring.com [207.69.200.64])
by venus.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA18408
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Mon, 1 Nov 1999 06:13:03 -0600
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: from codehead (ali-ca8-28.ix.netcom.com [209.110.225.220])
by smtp4.mindspring.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id HAA16214
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Mon, 1 Nov 1999 07:05:35 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 1 Nov 1999 04:00:19 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Subject: LRT-List: Doing Freedom
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.01b)
Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
A number of years ago, I was a dedicated hard-core libertarian
activist--very politically involved, very oriented toward organizing.
I built campaigns around issues and candidates, organized speakers'
bureaus, did coalition building around numerous issues with other
organizations, recruited activists, coordinated informational
blitzes, took public officials to court, etc. For a while I was even
an LP regional chair in California (4600 registered Libs in the
region), and my name was tossed around as a likely state chair in the
then not-too-distant future. In the process I organized groups as
large as 300 working activists (not "lurkers").
One of the most important lessons that I learned was: there are so
many issues that no one person can possibly hope to address even
those things that are local to him. There were frequently 15 or 20
people a week who would approach me with a brilliant idea (at least
to them!) and hope that I would pick it up and run with it just
because it was so obviously brilliant.
I couldn't possibly do that. What I could do--and did--was suggest
resources that they could tap and organizing tactics that they could
use. But the terrible reality of the situation was that I could
seldom fit in another task into the 40-80 hours per week or more that
I was doing other libertarian things.
A few--very few in fact--of those people who approached me with their
ideas were willing to go further than to ask me, "Why don't we...?"
(which usually means, Why don't YOU...?) Those who really were
serious went and did something about their ideas without requiring
somebody else to organize for them. And oddly enough, once it was
obvious that the person who suggested the idea was committed to
seeing it happen, I could often find resources to help out.
The point is that for most projects that get done by volunteers,
there has to be at least one evangelist. Someone who cares about it
passionately enough to organize the project, recruit people to do
specific jobs consonant with their individual interests and talents,
and see it through to the end.
Some of the recent discussion on the LRT list has been remarkably
like that I used to hear when I was regional chair. "Why don't
we....?" It's tempting to look at a list of 100 liberty-loving
subscribers and assume that all have similar interests, plenty of
time and resources, and the organizational ability to execute one
person's great idea. So a lot of ideas get run up the flagpole.
It's not possible to salute every one of them, or even many of them.
I can well appreciate the frustration implied by the statement, "I am
aware of nothing productive that I could do to help these little old
ladies." If one or more of the people on the LRT list wants to pick
up the issue and become its evangelist, great. If that person puts
out a call for *specific* resources, rest assured that a positive
response is much more likely, especially from this particular dork.
I am very disturbed by some of the inferences in the recent
discussion:
Inference: If you're talking about freedom, or thinking about
freedom, you're not DOING freedom.
[Gee, I thought it was all part of the same package. Part of the
point of talking is to explore common interests and capabilities, as
well as potential project ideas. Jumping into a project without
knowing who one is climbing into bed with or where the goal lies is
more likely to result in disaster, or at least not anything that
resembles real "freedom doing."]
Inference: If people don't do things as a group openly on the LRT
list, then the list is a waste.
[Much of what goes on isn't done in the open. It's generally
inappropriate and/or unnecessary to discuss the minutiae of project
execution for a project that is already "staffed up" and only
involves a few people. And it's generally indiscreet (see Second
Book of Claire, verses 75-6) to discuss on a public list sensitive
personal and technical information that sometimes has to be exchanged
to make a project work. Just because one cannot see the pistons move
does not mean that the engine isn't running.]
Inference: If people aren't doing what I think is *obviously* the
correct approach to doing freedom, then they're not doing freedom.
[What omniscience it must take to lay out the right path to doing
freedom! It makes me wonder if the people who hold that opinion have
a clue what freedom is about, or that it ultimately originates with
the individual, not from groupthink.]
On a personal note, I'd like to point out that I'm currently involved
with three projects that have arisen from the LRT list. All involve
other LRTers. On one of the projects, I suggested the idea and am
now one of two evangelists on the project. On the second, several
other people discussed the idea on the LRT list. While I didn't take
part in the discussion itself, it became the germ of a significant
business idea which I've become the sole evangelist for, but with
significant material assistance from other LRTers. On the third, I
was asked to participate by other LRTers acting as evangelists for
their idea. Saluting those three particular flags alone is costing
very significant amounts of time and money, resulting in much less
mindshare available for other flags. Anyone who wants what remains
is going to have to make a clear case for it, as well as show that
s/he is willing to champion the cause. I have absolutely no doubt
that at least some of the other people on the LRT list are facing
similar constraints.
Alternatives exclude.
You can do *anything* you want, but not *everything* you want.
As a positive counter to the above inferences, here's my substitutes:
1. Many projects are done by a subset of list members collaborating
together. Such projects tend to organize along the lines of what the
participants have learned about each other over time, and rely on the
trust and background knowledge developed during the "idle chitchat."
2. Once a person or persons has truly decided to do a project, it's
usually more efficient for participants and non-participants alike
and more desirable for the participants themselves if the discussion
of the project implementation moves off-list.
3. If 100 freedom-lovers were to gather in a room together, there
would be at least 101 different approaches to doing freedom. Some of
them would be good, considering the resources available. Some number
of them wouldn't. The problem is that the outcome of each approach
can *at best* be only very roughly approximated. Even Hari Seldon
couldn't make close to 100% correct predictions. For one person to
believe that he "has THE answer" strikes me as incredible hubris
rooted in incredible ignorance of the incredible complexity of human
affairs.
4. Never expect another person to have the same passion for a
project that the originator believes to be all-consumingly important.
5. If you want something done, do it yourself.
--- end forwarded text
