I would like to thank Tom Lamar for the leadership he took to do the
on line survey of participants. I found the results v. interesting
and provided excellent feedback on the e-mail discussion process.
I was particularly struck by the comment another person made.
"... 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.'"
I feel this way as well. Personally, I prefer the encouraging
and facilitating role of MV2020. Therefore, I get concerned
about name calling. To me "Baby Rushes" is a mean name and
contradicts the goal of encouraging and facilitating public dialogue.
A person can be liberal or conservative and still be a good person in
my view. "The farmer and cowman should be friends (Oklahoma)."
Other comments suggest that we should only talk among those of us who
are like minded and get on with the business at hand. I would like to
think that a discussion of differences in world views is getting to
the business at hand. I think people act on their values and their
associated theories of how the world works. To discuss these is to
get to the root of an issue in my view.
I can understand the impatience with the slowness of this process
and the frustration with the groping for the right level of
presentation. I think these are growing pains and a good
thing that will evolve for the better. I believe a clarification of
fundamental issues at the start can save time and effort in the long
run. Plus I enjoy the process of sharing with and learning from others
along the way. I hope others do as well.
Steve Cooke