[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [discuss] Individual representation

On 26 June 1999, Kent Crispin <kent@songbird.com> wrote:
>In fact, what is absolutely striking about all this is how few 
>people participate.


>So, I disagree -- the capture scenario is very possible, and all the 
>REAL evidence indicates that the number of people who will 
>participate individually is very low.

That's not real evidence.  First, you are not allowed to count physical
participation at all.  At least, not until you manage to pay for 
transportation for every individual wishing to attend these meetings in
person.  I would argue that the people physically present in any meeting
are a proper subset of the mailing lists, and should not be counted twice.

Second and most important:  The reason participation worldwide is so low
isn't because of a global case of apathy, or because we're the only ones
on the planet who care about this.  It's because we're invisible!  No
effort whatsoever has been made to explain any of this in layperson's 
terms to those it affects and who may be qualified to participate.  No
hand has been extended to them in an attempt to get them to join.  Not
a word about this has passed beyond the passive advertisement of these
proceedings on a few web pages.  In short, nobody's bothered to tell
the world this exists.  Until that time, you cannot make any assumptions
about the reasons behind the current levels of participation.

 Mark C. Langston