Re: What future for 2020?

["John and Laurie Danahy" <JDANAHY@turbonet.com>]

I do not believe that there has been a conscious decision to limit the
forum to this media.  Rather, the media has allowed growth through
convenience to the point that the listserve is now the central focus of
vision 2020.  I appreciate the ability to sit down and see what is the
current issue, and decide whether or not I wish to make a public statement
concerning it.  If we were to go to more "face to face" meetings, then I
would not attend.
One area that I think could be enhanced is the "action" area.  Perhaps this
forum could be used to put together groups or (dare I say it) committees to
work on specific issues.  The groups could then meet face to face to plan
actions.  The media would then be used to first identify issues, and then
to identify individuals with common goals they could pursue them
independently from the forum.

By the way, how would Kenton feel knowing his former residence is now
sporting a Dirk sign?

John
John and Laurie Danahy
jdanahy@turbonet.com

----------
From: Priscilla Salant <psalant@moscow.com>
To: vision2020@moscow.com
Subject: What future for 2020?
Date: Sunday, October 18, 1998 3:37 PM

---snip---
Should we be anything more than an electronic public forum?  Is there
energy among us for reaching a wider audience on issues of growth and
development?  For acting more and discussing less? I don’t mean to
undervalue this forum — I believe it has made many important contributions,
but are we making a conscious decision to limit ourselves to this media?

Should we re-constitute the structure of 2020 so that the steering
committee consists of more than these two old-timers?  (OK — so maybe we’re
just middle aged, but I for one would appreciate a few new voices.)

Are there particular issues or projects in which 2020 is especially
well-suited to become involved?

Is it time for ... hold on ... a face to face discussion of where we should
be going in the future?

Respectfully, 
Priscilla Salant


----------