* Login   * Register
It is currently Tue Jul 22, 2014 9:27 pm

View unanswered posts | View active topics



All times are UTC - 8 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic


 Post subject: Is this really such a bad idea?
PostPosted: Fri Nov 18, 2011 6:53 pm 
Offline
Contributing Member

Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2011 4:25 pm
Posts: 75
On a different message board, I made a post suggesting that congress should have its own message board that they can debate from in public view. I think the current system of debating is largely disorganized and the structure(especially in the house) makes it impossible to have a good back a forth with each other. A message board allows for a point-by-point debate and viewers can easily sift through the archived information in one centralized place. The unanimous opinion of everyone who responded was that it was pretty much a stupid idea for the following reasons:

1) It is a waste of tax dollars
2) It would just be politicians spewing out soundbites and talking points for their base without any substance and it would just devolve into a yelling match.
3) The speechwriters and aides would be making all of the actual posts.

My thoughts on that are :
(1) I have no idea how much this board would cost, but I doubt it would make a dent in the budget.
(2) Whatever you think about congress as a whole, there are a few good senators and representatives that would make real use out of this to challenge the others and provoke a substantive discussion. If this board did just act mostly as a medium for congressmen to shovel their BS, then so what? At least we would get to see the BS from both sides and have some semblance of a debate.
(3) I don't see much of a problem of congressional aides making all of the posts as long as the senators and representatives are responsible for what gets posted.

So, what are your opinions on this? Is this as bad of an idea as everyone on the other forum thinks? I think this is a common sense idea and I can't wrap my head around why everyone is so against it.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Is this really such a bad idea?
PostPosted: Fri Nov 18, 2011 6:55 pm 
Offline
Archon
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 09, 2007 4:37 pm
Posts: 25468
Location: Seattle
What is the impetus for congress to do this?

I mean . . sure, you'd like to read it.
But what's in it for Congress, other than having some written record of whatever they say being written in digital stone so it can haunt them the rest of their lives?

I guess I'm not seeing where it has a chance of ever happening.

_________________
In my defense . . .


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Is this really such a bad idea?
PostPosted: Fri Nov 18, 2011 7:14 pm 
Offline
Contributing Member

Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2011 4:25 pm
Posts: 75
DBTrek wrote:
What is the impetus for congress to do this?

I mean . . sure, you'd like to read it.
But what's in it for Congress, other than having some written record of whatever they say being written in digital stone so it can haunt them the rest of their lives?

I guess I'm not seeing where it has a chance of ever happening.


I think the odds of that happening right now are slim to nil. There are some prerequisites that would have to be done first. I posted what my basic strategy would be on this post.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Is this really such a bad idea?
PostPosted: Fri Nov 18, 2011 9:14 pm 
Offline
Archon
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2008 9:21 pm
Posts: 34624
The impetus for more clever and articulate representatives remains. This would be a good thing in the end. But to get it done, you would need to foster support from representatives who essentially are the modern version of sophists.

We do need to join our public discourse with government. That is how we can arrive at more novel and effective solutions, as well as avoid the shabby lawmaking of late. But the true adversaries to this are lobbyists, not representatives. If we had such a system, more educated and rhetorically effective politicians would rise to take advantage of it, just as they did in the days of direct democracy. The more democratic we become, the less power lobbyists can confer to their clients.

Thus if you want to establish such a system, you must identify your true opponents, the Washington lobby, and take the fight to them, not to politicians. To do that, perhaps the best tactic is to take the case directly to the people. Establish broad support. Then politicians would have no excuse to not establish a forum like that.

I think we would find the ontological and architectural problems inherent in such a system more challenging than establishing support for it. The cost of maintaining it would not be an issue. It also very well could get plenty of support from corporate donations. Space in cloud and server farms would go a long way towards making it happen. But you still need a way to make discourse both freely accessible and adequately broken up in order that you facilitate meaningful dialog. You also need to solve problems like filtering out trolls and bad ideas. Reduce flame wars to nonvisibility, etc. You could start with a voting system like slashdot pioneered. But you still need to break discussions up into smaller groups. Then try to put it all together. It's not an easy problem.

_________________
“If the human race is to survive, then for all but a very brief period of its history, the word ship will mean space ship.” –Arthur C. Clarke


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Is this really such a bad idea?
PostPosted: Sun Nov 20, 2011 8:11 pm 
Offline
Satrap
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2011 8:43 pm
Posts: 2757
Location: New Zealand
blahface wrote:
On a different message board, I made a post suggesting that congress should have its own message board that they can debate from in public view. I think the current system of debating is largely disorganized and the structure(especially in the house) makes it impossible to have a good back a forth with each other. A message board allows for a point-by-point debate and viewers can easily sift through the archived information in one centralized place. The unanimous opinion of everyone who responded was that it was pretty much a stupid idea for the following reasons:

1) It is a waste of tax dollars
2) It would just be politicians spewing out soundbites and talking points for their base without any substance and it would just devolve into a yelling match.
3) The speechwriters and aides would be making all of the actual posts.




1) Dan can manage a message and a podcast yet undoubtedly makes less than congress
2) I doubt that the politicians would have the time to do that (have a online yelling match i mean)
3) This sort of negates point 2, if the speech writers and aides where doing the posting they wouldn't get as emotionally offended when someone criticizes their boss post. Anyway as long as the aides/speech writers were posting what their bosses told them to write, and nothing else, it really would not matter.

Yeah in think a congress message broad would be a great idea, after all they don't do much anyway.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Is this really such a bad idea?
PostPosted: Tue May 08, 2012 5:33 pm 
Offline
New Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2010 12:51 am
Posts: 27
Maybe it can be done one their behalf by volunteers...if someone managed it honestly, a group of people could supply either form letter responses they received from the candidate, snippets of public speeches, or direct interview responses.

These could be updated by the candidate themself either directly or through a submission process (anything coming from an official email address on behalf of the candidate would be published immediately).

In this way, the words would get out there and certain candidates would likely wish to manage their own content (with the caveat that the group was allowed to publish 'official responses' when ever deemed necessary...the candidate could try to defend or deny the content as they wished, but couldn't remove it with 'denouncing' the content publicly) and others would likely pick up the maintenance if it were popular and their opponents were out performing them publicly.

Nothing is impossible, but few things worth doing are easy. We could literally do this ourselves if we actually wanted to...just a matter of the rewards (public discourse) outweighing the risks (possibly wasting a lot of time).

I think this might work particularly well with subjects Dan's talked about in the past. What if there were a topic on the definition of war and it being 'okay' that the executive branch has been declaring it. If you reached out to a bunch of representatives and ended up with a bunch of form letters, you could submit each of those to as comments to the topic and we could refer back to that as their most public 'official' response, and praise or criticize them on that basis. If they started getting questions referring to their 'official' position in this type of forum, it certainly wouldn't hurt the effort. They could say that's not their 'official' position, but we could point to the form letter, and ask them for an 'official' response we could replace it with.

_________________
-dnick
http://www.americanpeoplesassociation.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  


Post new topic Reply to topic

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group


Home l Common Sense l Hardcore History l Donate l Community l Merchandise l Blog l About Us