Evan Leibovitch wrote:
Wendy Seltzer wrote:
I don't want to devalue the ALSs, Yet you proposed a system that does just that.
No, I proposed a system that actually gives them ways to make a difference with the public, not just with their own groups of insiders.
but I do want to empower the individuals within and outside them.
The creation of a catch-all pseudo-ALS, offers fair involvement; anything beyond that empowers some to the penalty of others.
As I've said before, the goal here is should not be to give multiple points of entry to the existing insiders who know how to exploit the fine print, but to provide encouragement to those who aren't even yet part of the process. The emphasis should be to encourage participation through ALSs -- existing or potential -- with bypassing them through direct participation being seen as a last resort rather than a preferred method of access. We need a process that is not only fair but that _appears_ fair, and that means not elevating the influence of the would-be elite at the outset.
It's hardly the elite. The elites have already gone and formed their own constituencies, with voting rights, and left us this muddle. I don't find the ALS process democratic, so I'm trying to allow more routes for those who don't get to speak through it. --Wendy
In my own opinion, anyone who is more interested in policy than ego should have no problem participating through an ALS (or -- failing that -- joining a NPO that shares their views and spearheading a move for that NPO to become an ALS). I have little sympathy for those who are too self-important to give the ALS process a chance; their greed and impatience should not be rewarded.
- Evan
-- Wendy Seltzer -- wendy@seltzer.org phone: +1.617.418.3456 / +44 (0)1856 287203 // cell: 914.374.0613 Visiting Fellow, Oxford Internet Institute Visiting Assistant Professor of Law, Brooklyn Law School Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/seltzer.html http://www.chillingeffects.org/