There might be some information we can use here.
Thank you to all the responders.
Fritz
1. How often do you read these messages?
* Almost daily. Well, honestly, I check them everyday, but I don't read
them all. I skip most of the preachy stuff from the self-proclaimed
"conservatives".
* Daily
* daily
* Daily
* Once every three or four days
* Every day (but not every one)
* daily, Monday to Friday weekends if I can reach the WSU mainframe, which
isn't easy when the students are in town.
* Every day.
* Daily unless out of town
* 3 times/wk
* almost every day
* as they are sent I skim for content
* I try to at least scan them regularly, but I get so many e-mail messages,
from vision2020 and many other sources, that I don't always get to do even
that. I'm very interested in local events, but my time's very limited, and
I'm using the vision2020 list just to get a handle on community doings.
* Every day
* About once a day
* Whenever I read my mail, what do you think?
* Daily
* about four times per week>
* 4-5 times per week>
2. Have you ever resonded or are you a "lurker"?
*Lurker
* I have responded, although mostly to specific requests. I am often turned
off by the lengthy monologues that tend to dominate the screen now and
then.
* responded often and tried to provoke responses through inquiries and
provocative postings
* I respond>
* I respond and start new threads.
* Purely a lurker.>
* I have responded.
* Responded.
* have only responded once, to this list
* I respond
* Responded once? twice?
* lurker, although I have forwarded dialogue to a planner friend in NH.
* Responded 1x - mostly lurker
* Mostly lurk, a few posts.
* Responded when I had something to add.
* yes, no
* Mostly a "lurker" so far (have a lot of other e-mail business that takes
my time).
* yes
* Yes, responded
* Yes.
3. Have you learned about public meetings, or other civic processes through
this process that you wouldn't have known about otherwise?
* yes
* Yes
* Yes, definitely .
* yes, like Quail Run from hell
* Yes.
* well, yes, but I'm not that interested in most postings
* Yes.
* yes>
* Yes
* yes, I like using this process for that sort of notification.
* Yes
* Yes
* a few, but I find about most of them through traditional means
* Yes
* Yes
* yes
* You bet. Good stuff.
* Yes
* More -- it's really a great information source!!!>
4. Has this discussion made you more or less likely to participate in other
ways in the local decision making process.
* Theoretically more likely, but again, with the demands on my
time, my partication's likely to be limited. I do feel like I've become
pretty well-informed about local issues via this list.
* More
* same
* Neither more nor less.
* more likely
* no change
* Less, reading and responding is v. time consuming.
* No difference.
* I think I have participated more, but I haven't gone to any more meetings.
* if more people would sign up to monitor a given agency's meetings, I
would be less likely to go. as it is, I feel I need to go to a lot anyway.
* No effect
* I'd say more likely. I know about the meetings and issues.
* Yes
* more>
* About the same, just a different avenue
* I think less, it gives me the illusion that i'm up to speed
* yes
* More
* Neither more or less
5. Are diverse points of view represented?
* not really
* Not so far.
* yes
* Only somewhat
* God, yes.
* A little.
* They seem to be, at least in some areas.
* They seem to be.
* Yes
* Yes...although the conservative right is under-represented.
* One or two. I've almost been tempted to play "devil's advocate" just to
get something other than either extreme economic individualism or elitist
planning expressed.
* Generally yes, but am somewhat troubled by tone occasionally and find
that the more strident the tone, the less likely I am to participate.
* vast numbers of citizens w/out modems and computers are not represented
* yes, especially concerning property rights
* Unfortunately.
* Pretty much
* yes>
* not really... we need a way to give non-Internet subscribers a direct way
to respond and participate
* I'd say so, yes.
6. Do you have any suggestion on how we can we make this thing work better?
* >teach the public school teachers how to use email & netnews
* No, it seems to work OK, although the participants appear to be voices
crying in the wilderness.
* format so that messages can be posted, can be browsed, can remove
messages of interest, and do not clutter e-mailboxes (like other internet
discussion groups). Otherwise, the listserver is a valuable community
contribution.
* What does "work better" mean? I'm confident we can reach e-mail users
with this method, but it certainly doesn't get at everyone with whom we
should communicate.
* Keep advertising that it is available -- reminders reminders. Short
surveys are good -- always state the use to which the info will be put. The
survey technique is a good way to get input from people too busy with other
net business (related to work, for example) to craft original messages.
* Not yet.
* Come up with our own set of netiquette. And give hints now and then. For
instance, perhaps one of the lurkers has some great ideas, but they aren't
likely to respond unless someone writes them personally. Also, if someone
else worries that they "talk" too much, let's help them learn how to
listen.
* I'd like to see more contributions from all participants... I feel like
I'm doing too much "talking" and not enough "listening"
* Not really, the list server is new and seems to be fresh enough to still
be generating its own internal excitment.
* Not really. This is not unlike other lists, but knowing all the people
involved makes it less anonymous and much more personal.
* What do you mean by "work better"?
* If there were some way to subdivide the list a bit-- so that I could get
information/announcements on meetings separate from discussion of issues--
that would be a help. Some of the discussions get pretty abstruse, and I'm
likely to pay closer attention to meeting announcements if I can easily
"pick them out" from among my other messages.
* It might be nice to have several listservers that have different
discussions going. Say one to discuss the real growth issues....and then
maybe another one for the "baby Rushes" to sharpen their horns.
* accept the fact that it is not the be-all and end-all communication
instrument,and take a long hard look at what it can and cannot do well> >
* just keep on with the dialogue!
* No. But I feel this confusion: 2020 seems to have two personas: a private
one, which is a group of dedicated activists with a specific agenda; and a
public one, which is 'we're here to encourage and facilitate public
participation in planning issues.'
* Moderated discussion to keep the "Baby Rush" spamming out. A regular
weekly calendar. A www site to display more long term issues and calendars.
* Not at this time.
* if you are refering to Vision 2020, yes, I think we must remember to hold
actual face to face meetings. We need one now, for example to decide the
where we go from here, and to catch up on what we had declared as our goals
earlier
Palouse-Clearwater Environmental Institute "Increasing citizen involvement
P O Box 8596; 112 West 4th St; Suite #1 in decisions that affect our
Moscow ID 83843-1096 region's environment."
Phone (208)882-1444 Fax (208)882-8029
e-mail pcei@moscow.com
WWW http://www.moscow.com/Resources/PCEI