CAB - Communication Agents Blog

Robin Good Interviewed by Dave Pollard

If there is one thing my friends now me for, is my good ability of asking questions.

"Where are you going?"

"What are you trying to accomplish in this life"

"Why are you wasting time living a loop made of making money to pay the bills?"

It's time again to play with those hard-to-come questions we so rarely hear in our neighborhood discussions. I find it extremely good to play with exploring issues and topics which are so much more important to my ability to make my life a positive, meaningful, creative event and not a routine set of habits and duties carried out to survive a controlled system system which offers no options to be truly innovative or diverse from the mainstream.

These are the five questions that Dave Pollard has sent me to answer while engaging me in a delightful treat called the Interview Game (see more info at the end of this interview).

I am so excited about answering them, I have avoided all possible ways to read them. Even now that I am about to write my answers to them, I hesitate to look and read as I anticipate the subtle pleasure of opening up and sharing with you important issues and topics that are really close to my heart.

Thanks Dave for letting me play.

1. What one thing do you most hope to be remembered for after you die?

I wish to remembered for having been a effective change agent. An inquisitive, rebellious and passionate man who explored and brought back new ways of looking at how to communicate, live, work, interact and bring back our lives to be the valuable and uniquely precious critical missions they were originally meant to be.

2. What do you think is the single greatest threat to the survival of the world today, and what do you think is the greatest hope?

The singlest threat to the survival of the world as we now it now is the powerful interests of few who stand behind the largest economic interests of this world. These are mainly the petrochemical industries and the pharma-cartel along with the present economic and monetary bank system. Our inability to recognize and unveil the real truth behind many of todays most critical existential questions is the sad consequence of the skillful use of media, communication, science and education used to maintain and increase a controlled system of basically enslaved human beings (please see some excellent writings by Mathias Rath to further understand what I am taling about.)

The greatest hope is one that I, you, Sepp, Chris, Mathias Rath and others will be able to re-awaken enough minds to get our positive, benevolent virus to become a planetary epidemic. It is indeed through communication and exchange that this paradigmatic change can come to be and it is then up to the ones who hold the keys to effective communication to be the paladins of this renaissance and re-evolution.

3. What single life lesson do you think is most important for young people to learn?

I think that the key lesson I learned in life is not to trust established authority as it comes. I have learned very early to question and ask WHY things are in one way and not in some other one. Question reality and become responsible for the realities you create, design, generate and influence. There are no accidents taking place. You are here because this is the only sensible place to be in at this point in your journey.

Secular laws, dogmatic rules, core principles and formulas, scientific truths, historical facts, religions, doctor's medicines, you name it. They are all there to set you up into viewing a world reality that is as fabricated and artificial as any movie you can go and see now at a theatre. And yet, most of us take it and drink it as REALITY.

Questioning reality, searching and exploring, asking many questions, is the most important thing for a young person to learn: call it critical thinking.

4. Of all the people alive today, who do you think would make the best President of the US? Why?

I am not closely following the US presidential elections as I am seeing mostly a competition between false alternatives in a very closed system. If there was a man that didn't come from the right or left but brought together the principles outlines in my Areas for Change in a first-time showing of upwardness that would certainly be my man. If I were to be burned if I didn't submit a name to this question I would feel my heart closest to Kucinich.

5. If you had a million dollars, what would you spend it on?

I would provide the one million dollar to a fund similar like the Communication Agents Initiative that would facilitate, support and motivate uniquely talented communicators, researchers and free thinkers of this world to dive into the open intelligent global conversation we have just started. It is in this conversation and in the voices of some of these free independent minds that we can resurrect and find our ability to take back our initiative to question, redesign and change the reality around us.

It is access to unique information that gives the ability to very few humans to keep the other 6 billion of us at bay. Missing critical information to us we can only worry about the apparent troubles and concerns broadcasted by CNN or your preferred local network channel. Trash your TV and start asking yourself some real questions. If you want power and initiative to go back to the individual where it originally belonged, you need only provide information and alternative resources for your fellow man to use and select from.

"Let me dig on my own and see what kind of jewels I can discover while you waste your days discussing Sunday's match winner or the latest SARS scam alarm."

Give power to individual free voices and hear the world recognize its own voice again.

If you like the Interview Game here are the rules to play it:

THE RULES

1. Leave me an email [provide your e-mail address], saying you want to be interviewed.

2. I will respond; I’ll ask you five questions.

3. You’ll update your website with my five questions, and your five answers.

4. You’ll include this explanation, and acknowledge me as the interviewer.

5. You’ll ask other people five questions when they want to be interviewed.

Is It A Platform Or A System That We Are Trying To Change?

Luigi Bertuzzi - unique CA disrupting and questioning support force

Today I have received a very interesting post from Luigi Bertuzzi, who rightly engages us on a question about terminology and significance of our desire to bring about effective change?

In his reasoning he brings about some interesting questions and conceots making his effort and direction much clearer to understand.

Here is his post and Sepp's comments to it:

Dear Robin,

Re: off-line comments received about
http://robingood.typepad.com/ commagents_blog/2003/09/ how_to_change_a.html#c179130

I have no problem replacing the word *platform* with the word *system*,
if the previous one doesn't make readers feel *actioned*.

A post about *change*, if I may say so, should make its readers feel *actioned*. I, for one, felt actioned by the above referenced post of yours and entered a comment which *wishes to contribute to the
prospective making of an action plan*.

The off-line comments I've read tell me I've failed my objective. Good. We learn by mistake. I'll do a quick revision of my choice of word *platform*, if that causes a bigger problem than the one it tries to address, and then I'll get rid of it.

I'm *questioning* (have I seen this word used in Zoe's Weblog?) the nature and the use of some of the weblogs I'm looking at. Among these there is Robin Good's Communication Agents' Blog (CAB).

One of the issues I've seen in a CAB's post, and made a comment about, addresses nothing less than *the system we live in* and the approach to be taken for making it obsolete, when it leaves too much to be desired, i.e.: the (to be defined) action of *walking away from it* until it becomes obsolete.

Now, walking away from a system we don't like is easier to say than to do.

When it comes to sharing views about the need to contribute *changing* anything *system-wise*, inevitably, prospective parties of a *change action plan* chicken out when it comes to talking *differently from how we eat* because they *must pay the rent (or *tengono famiglia*, in Italian).

I have always been pinned down on my attempt to use the word *platform* as a shortcut for *system*, because it sounds aimless. Note: if I use the word *system* I get pinned down because it sounds too complex. Yet, explaining *platform* is a lot easier than it is to explain *system*.

As a matter of fact, *the system* we live in looks to me like a *merry-go-round*, which is nothing else than *a platform*, spinning around a platform keeper (not necessarily an individual).

In such platform/system example what goes on is very simple to describe.

There are a number of roles a child might wish to take up: bus driver, horse rider, plane pilot .... Once a role is selected, that's it. There is no communication among roles. It's the perfect anticipation of the
*closed compartment life style* a child is going to experience in life, as an employed grown up person. Once *in a role* one can only wait for a change when boarding for the next merry-go-round ride begins ... or go looking for another merry go round with a different choice of roles.

With this *platform perspective*, if it is not a load of rubbish instead of a down sized system description, I can sense that *Weblogs are platforms as well*. Just replace *roles* with *topics* and there you are. You a have a beautiful display of *communication-wise frozen-stiff topics* spinning around a (difficult to say who or what) platform keeper. Each post may have no or many comments. The comments are just like the children who take turns at selecting the role for their ride of the moment. Action wise, they produce no change at all.

How do we walk away from a place, and how do we know we are heading towards a better one, if we don't own and share a description of the place we want to walk away from?

Why my clumsy attempt, to describe what I want to walk away from, may easily get rated as *epistemology*, (i.e. something I would not even know how to explain), just because I have tried to use the word *platform*, which does not seem difficult at all to explain?

Am I questioning something that I should NOT question, *for fear* of finding myself falling in absolute emptiness? Does the word *platform* evoke *epistemology*, or does it evoke *fear*? The fear we sense when our feet are not firmly planted on solid ground, for instance.

What else could one *imagine*, that might contribute creating a *base camp for web destinations* instead of *yet another platform*? A *base camp* concept should not mean its structural properties: one should
rather see it as *the get together* of like minded people who may share the curiosity and the willingness to *walk towards* some attractive (web based) achievement.

In practical terms, how might the post that I have tried to comment translate into the collaborative editorial activity required by the drafting of an action plan that can be shared by a few *initiators*, and shown around to invite others to join in ... ?

I guess one should do better and cancel all imagination flights ... if their take off ground is still covered by fog, so thick that a choice of word may prevent the reading of all the intentions behind it.

I am now ready to stay put, until I have identified a role I can take up without questioning its meaning. With all due respect, if anything I'm trying to say trods inadvertently on anybody's feet, and kindest regards ..

Luigi

And here is Sepp Hasslberger email comments after I had forwarded Luigi's reply to him:

Dear Robin,

as far as I can divine from Luigi's writing, he is concerned with the whole direction of a change effort such as ours. He says the present situation is a "system" and the situation we envisage is a different "system", and that change happens by "drifting" from one to another.

He is correct to say that one should have a good idea of both systems, and a way to measure progress going from one system to another. This is a very general view of our work and is not something which at this stage would be vital, but in any case, it is never bad to have some kind of reality check to gauge your progress. Is it going in the right direction? Are we moving at all?

Sepp

The question and issues raised are important to us and I don't know if I share Luigi's view on paralelling our communication efforts to static role that have no power to bring about any change.

We are here to expose what is the present system and to draft and suggest the new skyline to paint on the horizonline. How can we not be effective change agents?

It would be great to read other opinions on this as well.

In any case, as we approach the official and public launch of the new Communication Agents site we do like to question how effective is the change model at hand and how can we refine and improve our precision ballistic system to make it ever more effective.

Thomas Khun holds in my opinion one of the better keys to explain and understand how we can ever accomplish such ambitious goal and it is no surprise that references and lins to his majestic work his gloriously absent. In his theory of Scientific Revolutions he clearly explains how several factors simultaneously at work can and have in the past human history caused paradigmatic changes similar to the one we are trying to facilitate through our Communication Agents Initiative efforts.

How To Change This World? Be The Change!

We must thank and celebrate the excellent work done by David Pollard on his very generous site entitled "How To Save The World".

Dave has recently picked up on the great work by Dana Meadows and has effectively summarized its crucial points in a wonderful essay.

What Dave lays in front of you is a very precious recipe of advice and directions that will be quite likely part of our change action plan. The core issues listed by Dana Meadows do provide some wonderful and enlightnening view on what we must look at to be able to bring about the "deep", transformatory" change we are working for.

Especially inspiring is the passage from Thomas Khun that highlights in a wonderful synthesis our very own mission as Communication Agents:

"You keep pointing at the anomalies and failures in the old paradigm,

you come yourself, loudly, with assurance, from the new one,

you insert people with the new paradigm in places of public visibility and power.

You don't waste time with reactionaries;

rather you work with active change agents and with the vast middle ground of people who are open-minded."

This is a celebration of our spirit as Communication Agents and of the ethics and approach we believe will contribute to make change take over.

How encouraging to know, that at least in our minds and hearts, we are trying to be that very force!

Robin

HOW TO CHANGE ANYTHING by Dave Pollard

Systems thinking is an interesting and disciplined way to look at how things work, and how to bring about change. Peter Senge may be the guru of systems thinking, but Dana Meadows was its master. The late Ms. Meadows, author of The Limits to Growth, founder of the Sustainability Institute and writer of The Global Citizen column until her death two years ago, wrote a remarkable paper for Whole Earth magazine in 1997 that described how to change anything by using one of ten system leverage points, which she listed in increasing order of power (and also increasing order of difficulty).

Here is a summary of these points in layman's terms, with some examples of how they could be used to bring about remarkable change.

1) Change the Measurements & Formulas

2) Change the Inventories and Flow Rates of Resources

3) Regulate Negative Impacts and Vicious Cycles

4) Sustain Virtous Cycles

5) Provide New Information

6) Change the Rules, or Who Makes and Enforces Them

7) Create a New System That Makes the Old One Obsolete

8) Change the Goals

9) Change the Mindset

10) Be The Change
Be open, yourself, to new ideas and ways of thinking. Be able to change. Acquire an ability to let go of things that no longer work, no longer make sense. Perhaps she's paraphrasing Ghandi when he said, simply, Be the Change.

Some of the above are our very own goals as Communication Agents in this very project. For example n.5 Provide New Information is one among our key tasks. As you scroll down the list you find goals that nonetheless ambitious are more and more in synch with the spirit of the Communication Agents Initiative.

I stronly suggest you give a good read Dave Pollard original article which provides a lot more depth and reference to the original sources. He also goes in depth at providing his own vision for how each one of the then above listed points shoudl/could/is handled.

A great read and very inspiring too, not only because it brings back valuable know-how that I didn't even know existed but also because it provides a timely new point of reference for our work at hand.
Original post by Dave Pollard.

Thanks Dave!

Robin Good

If Somebody Started To Ask Some Questions

Thanks to Zoe Lenska, through whom I received this valuable link.

If you do have a connection that is better than 56K you should seriously take the time (48 mins.) to look at this dutch documentary on the American corporate group called Carlyle.

While I have been familiar with the Carlyle Group since the Semptember 11 attack I have never been able to have access to such an open, detached and trustworthy account of what the Carlyle Group exactly is, what it does, how it does it and what interests and strategies it ultimately pursues.

I find it illuminating and I would recommend its vision to anyone who enjoys critical thinking about the current political situation in the world and about the forces at work from within the US that, from certain points of you, seem to be capable of closely directing and influencing major global scale decisions.

If you add to this the fact that this documentary speaks no technical language and allows anyone to understand issues that do not ever make to the major US and western-world media, you can see that you are in for a pretty unique viewing.

The Carlyle Group Exposed
From Paul
Source: InformationClearingHouse 7-8-3

A 48 minute documentary well worth watching. It's Dutch but almost all of it is in spoken English with Dutch subtitles so we English speakers don't miss much.

Exposed: The Carlyle Group

Shocking documentary uncovers the subversion of Americas democracy.

I defy you to watch this 48 minute documentary and not be outraged about the depth of corruption and deceit within the highest ranks of our government and the first family.

Perhaps the naive will be shocked. The foreign policies of nations have long been linked to the business aspirations of their corporations (ex. Hudson's Bay Co, East India Company...etc.) . It is completely normal.
Where the investment dollar goes the soldiers follow.

Paul

[via Zoe Lenska]

Hats to the Dutch company "Tegen Licht", and to the director (IJzeren Driehoek) and producer who have made this wonderful work. I would like to be able to promote more of their work and if there is a way to do so please contact me and let me know.

The Transitioner Asks Some Critical Questions About CAs

Dear Robin,

I thank you very much for your mail and I salute your initiative. Please forgive me for not responding earlier, I am stuck in too many lives now, it will take some more time before I can find the right harmonious balance(social transformation, family life, paying work, physical training, spiritual life… and short delay in responding to high standard project like yours).

Dear Jean-François thanks for your very kind response and intelligent feedback on my Communication Agents Initiative project. I am thankful to you for providing some challenging questions and critical points to reflect upon.

In this public response I take on each and everyone of your questions while trying to provide answers and clarifications in a language clear enough for everyone else interested in the topic to gain a bit greater insight.

As any new initiatives, it is always easier to draw up a list of doubts than bringing positive elements that will facilitate the journey. Just like chartering a sailboat for a new expedition across the seas, there are always people that weigh your mind down with doubtful questions, projecting their own fears on you and justifying why they are not doing something themselves.

This is why I believe it is important to listen only to people who are either helping the project or sailing on their own sea journey because they know what it makes ;-)

This being said, I have not enough knowledge and insight to evaluate the chances of your project, i.e. if it will reach a critical stream of demand and offer so that it can fly by itself.

You certainly have the answer since you are launching it and I would love to learn from you about this issue. As I said before your initiative generates a strong respect and admiration, and if I can be of any help during the expedition, let me know.

From my very personal small experience and individual perspective, it raises a few thoughts and related questions :

1. Change agents are often “transitioners”, i.e. people who are not that rich because they are very dedicated to… change. Change doesn’t pay because whatever is the topic it is, in some way or another, it stands against our current economic rules.

Definitely correct, most change agents are interested in change rather than economic return.
In fact, for some individuals, bringing about social change is the overriding purpose of their lives, or at least a temporary priority.

2. Today, our monetary system is based on greed and scarcity, in other words this transactional tool has deserted most value creation areas where change can come from. Why? Because interest based placement are safer and because value creation nests hardly match with ROI rational perspective.

This is why most today’s change comes from places where money is absent or scarce: free software, social software, LETS, socio-economy, third world, NGOs, spiritual & religious movements…"

The assessment of our monetary system is exactly correct.

The system is set to PREVENT change in any form. The scarcity of monetary medium keeps everyone preoccupied with making enough income to just barely survive, and those who make more are offered plenty of distractions on which to spend the "surplus", that they will not get into "change making" themselves. I do see a possibility though that those who do have a sufficient income and who do desire to see change can contribute by supporting Communication Agents without having to give up their income-making or their comforts.

I do appreciate LETS systems for a change in economy, though we need to go through some more informed discussion and some spreading of the news through other Communication Agents to effectively help this type of approach come along.

I don't see us as a large enough group to be able to put an alternative monetary system to work inside the CommAgents proper (at least for now) but definitely, we could push that particular Area ahead in an effective way, if we had someone who sees it as a noble job to put his/her efforts into bringing about that change.
(Sepp Hasslberger)

For these reasons it is more likely that many valuable change agents, even those who have a very high and visible impact, may not be able to afford the expense for the learning expedition you offer.

This further leads to the following sub-questions:

2.1 Have you explored ways to finance the trainees? Foundations? Partnership with schools & universities?

For now I have put in place a Learning Support Fund which is a simple way for individuals that want to support this initiative to do so. So far it has been quite successful as we have been able to raise over € 8000 to support the first six Communication Agents that could prove need for financial support.

On the other hand I could see that if we had a bit more capacity it would be certainly appropriate to seek out the type of donors and potential supporters that you have so clearly indicated (Foundations, Academic institutions, etc.).

I must also confess that I am negatively prejudiced against these, as most of them are financed by the very forces that we are so openly trying to expose and overthrow.

I am also aware that there other, smaller institutions and organizations that may escape my above fears and I invite you and others that are well aware of them to provide me with specific names and contact points for me to follow up directly with this.

2.2 You have explored scenarios of ROI in a to f in
"CA can make a profit" , but these are just seen as potential possibilities. Do you think it is possible and necessary to head for a more entrepreneurial perspective? (ie what offer for how much payback on which market?). It might be perceived as vague for now (maybe this is what you want at the moment).

I agree with you that this should not be a forced road. It should also be clear though that in acknowledge economy some information or some assembled and highly forms of it maybe ethically traded or sold for other services to others. I do not see anything wrong with this, and I actually appreciate the regenerative and intellectual enriching process they naturally bring about.

My ideas are not only Good wishes. I am trying and testing each and every one of them on my own skin. Independent publishing, expert advice, online training, consulting, information brokering, online conferences are all being tested and developed as valuable roads to provide Communication Agents with opportunities for self-sustainability and growth.

So, yes, I think it is definitely possible to consider social entrepreneurship as a viable option for those who identify in it. I also disagree with the view that would make appear social entrepreneurship directed by unrelated market demand. If Communication Agents operate and create change through the making available of new information, perspectives, solutions and tools in all key Areas for Change (……) demand will be equally high in all of them as all humans are deeply interested in all that closely relates to the r personal happiness, freedom, wealth and sustainability. Demand is therefore skewed only by the way the information is presented, packaged, aggregated, filtered and made available. It is in this realm that there is ample opportunity for creating the new ethical opportunities for self-learning, discovery and personal awakening without conflicting with social and ethical business issues.

2.3 You are presenting potential benefits mostly through individual actions and from perspectives of the individual (example: sales of books). But what strength and value can be generated as a whole from the whole team of participants? What is more than the sum of individuals that can generate a high delta of value? What scenarios of cross-fertilization and cross-empowerment do you see? What value can be harvested from the diversity of the potential rhizomatic organization you envision? What can participants do for one another?

Isn’t that a wonderful question!

The synergy among the individual Communication Agents appears in my vision as being directed toward creating concerted efforts toward the change and reform of specific areas. Small groups of Communication Agents are motivated to cross-breed and to fertilize each one’s ideas in order to find applicable new frameworks and prototypeable solutions.

The delta value I see is the one that small groups of experienced Communication Agents will create very powerful vectors of attention and will be able to stir and direct attention and rapid change action to critical Areas for Change.

Only small groups of CAs may enough intellectual clout and complementarity to be able to draw full operational proposals and plans for action, acting eventually as true people representative units.

This is probably only the surface of what will emerge out of this efforts as the new values to be harvested from these synergies are completely new to us and difficult to anticipate at this early stage of development.

It would appear to me that many individuals and small groups that have remained ineffective or isolated since the late 60s have now an opportunity to sync-up and join forces physically ad intellectually at many different levels. In my effort I am providing a supportive framework for a first set of pioneering ones, many of which are still developing the global understanding and vision necessary to make future changes truly lasting.

2.4 Have you thought of a potential inner economic system of value exchange and creation that could work without traditional currencies?

Yes, I have been inspired in the past by examples and references to transaction-based economic systems as the one outlined by Michael Phillips in 1984(ISBN 0-931425-04-2). He wrote in the summary to his "Transaction Based Economics":

"Contemporary economic theory is based on the "exchange" of good and services for a price. When exchange is the basic premise, much of the theoretical structure follows deductively and results in a competitive theory of economics. This book is based on "transactions" as the basic unit of economics.

In the conceot of "exchange", price is the only component of importance. In the concept of "transactions", price is one of several components; others include service, information, quality, repair and recourse.

When transactions are the basis of economic theory, the real world of business is observed to operate most effectively with conditions of cooperation and service to customers rather than competition and profit maximization. The traditional economic focus on monopoly and ownership is replaced by concern about honesty and social values."

There are and have been several other writers and economic experts who have already envisioned an usury-free non-monetary system at work in a society unplagued by the false believe that there is not enough to go for both me and you. Several roads are pen there and we are all very open to study, learn and understand which ones would be most apt for our different tasks at hand.

I would be very interested in enriching my know-how in this direction and I therefore invite you to suggest and point to their inspiring visions available in this direction.

These are the questions that come to my mind and I don’t know if they are useful and relevant for your project. Sorry if they are not, this is the best I can offer for now. If the socio-economic question and currency question are of interest for you (and I believe they are), you will be shortly updated with TheTransitioner where many things are about to happen.

Warmest regards,

Jean-François Noubel
The Transitioner

Thanks again Jean-François for this great set of questions! Each one of them has offered me extra opportunity to reflect and to further question myself on those very critical issues. I have so increased further my knowledge, or personal wealth as from each exploration one can only increase the only unique real wealth available to us.

What we know.

I recommend readers of Robin Good’s Sharewood Tidings and to subscribers of the MasterMind Explorer newsletter to definitely pay a curiosity visit to your excellent online resource “The Transitioner” and to subscribe to your quality written essays.

Overall, I find the discussion stimulating because the financing of the initiative is still a point of uncertainty, and some of the questions and the ideas you have brought forward might well be vital to the long term success of the project.

Robin Good and CA Sepp Hasslberger

Ecademy Members Question CAI Value. Who Is Right?

An interesting number of posts (7) has been generated by Suhit Anantula brief public message on Ecademy, after announcing his successfull application to the Communication Agents Initiative. many of the questions and doubts raised by Ecademy members reflect the standard reactions I have been getting from most people that have not heard before of the CAI or that have not seriously invested some time in reading the details of the Initiative or looking at the excellent work done by our first three pioneer Communication Agents online.

Josef Hasslberger - Health Supreme

Chris Gupta - Share The Wealth

Ivan Ingrilli - Grillo Parlante

From left to right: Sepp, Chris(in his previous lifetime), Ivan.

So here is what Ecademy members had to say, comment and question about the Communication Agents Initiative.

Joe wrote:

"Am I missing something?

Whilst very noble, the activities supported here look like the sort of site that socially aware networkers have been doing for the last decade in one form or another - paper, book, online, whatever.

It's very interesting, and I see the 'technical support' angle as being useful, but surely CAs are just another name for authors with things to say?

Joe

reply by Robin Good on 20/07/03 - 15:04

Joe, thank you for good critical comment. This is the type of questions I need to make sure that my offer is properly understood as I am refining the terms and wording through which I convey it.

Indeed the Communication Agents Initiative is NOT looking for authors "with things to say".
I am looking for uniquely skilled communicators that have something strong to say and something greater to do in one or more of the Areas for Change that compose our first reference Manifesto. I am looking for what many would call a present-day online social activist.

Joe, I have looked far and wide on the Internet and I have not been to find but a handful of individuals doing what I am describing. If you know anyone of those that are not already listed on our blogrolls, then we may like very much you to introduce a few more to us.

I am not looking for writers with something to say, I am looking for talented communicators who want to take on the opportunity given by today's rapid change, communication tools and fertile world social awareness, to initiate effective campaigns, actions and design of solution frameworks that allow non governmental forces to create alternative and parallel infrastructures to deal and solve major human issues.

All the best,

Robin GoodIdeas, Tools and Resources for Communication Agents
http://www.masternewmedia.org/
reply to this comment edit

reply by John Bolton on 20/07/03 - 19:39

"Take a look at www.oneworld.net. They empower people without charging the fees that you do. There are plenty of low-cost or open source software tools for activists which can make a real difference."

reply by Robin Good on 20/07/03 - 20:00

Thanks John for your comment and suggestion.

I have indeed looked at Oneworld.net but I do not see any of the offering that I am making available through their initiative.

Let me resummarize this:

What I offer is a learning partnership with skilled communicators to master while doing the key methods and tactics that are available today for carrying out effective communications.

The use of tools, tactics, and technologies like RSS, news aggregators, news syndication, site optimization and indexing inside major search engines, plus writing and content development skills are not features that you can find in any service, book, or online course available today.

Social activists online are a rare beast. Bloggers have hardly any major social activist doing sustained publishing outside of the 10-15 key ones that are quite well known. In my opinion there is no such group online, but I do invite you to point to me new directions and examples.

I am whether you like this or not a quite special human being and have collected a few credentials along the way to show that my personal mentorship is something of extreme value. The first three existing Communication Agents testify to this and I openly invite to show me other online writers that have the direction, focus and depth of these three. Please show me where they are.

I would be very interested in partnering with other technology and service suppliers tat could promote/associate their name with the Initiative while offering other tools to simplify or augment this challenging and ambitious task.

Finally, I really have a hard time making a parallel between Oneworld.net, where no matter how hard I search I cannot really download or login into any tool allowing me to publish news and articles instantaneously, nor I have a personal mentor that takes care of developing a strategic communication path tailored to my own social goals. Or is there one?

On top of this let me underline that what CAs publish online is also being picked up by major news sources, syndicated on multiple sites on the Internet and being indexed within the same day by Google.
Does Oneworld.net or any other communication specialist offer anything like this?
If you know him or her, put us in touch.

Looking forward to find out more about what I have been probabòy missing throughout.

Robin GoodIdeas, Tools and resources for Communication Agents
http://www.masternewmedia.org/

reply by Joe Pritchard
on 21/07/03 - 07:40

"Hi Robin,

"Social activists online are rare beasts..." - ummm....not really. Where do I start? What do you define as a social activist? Let's keep it broad. I didn't know what to look for so I just typed in 'social activist networks' in to Google. Here are a few relevant references from the 88000 pages returned by Google. Now, I KNOW that a lot of these will be irrelevant, but....these are meta-lists, pointing to lists of activist groups / individuals.

http://community.web.ca/index.shtml
Activists Networks
http://www.unaids.org/links/activist.asp

In addition there's a wealth of academic research there. I myself in my IE Favourites lists have several online social activist groups, including a self-help philanthropy group in the US (www.modestneeds.org) a sites about the LETS system (http://www.gmlets.u-net.com/) and a further site helping supply balanced information and support about the plight of women in post-war Afghanistan. I've assisted a developer work with the last site, just as I have, in the last 10 years, aided and abetted numerous social groups with technical support, hosting, etc. all free of charge - for the love of the cause.

Ever since the publication of books like 'The Aquarian Conspiracy' there have been social networks with purpose forming and exploiting the technologies available, without the assistance of mediators. If people needed techie help, they would come to sympathisers with the knowldege required.

"I am whether you like this or not a quite special human being and have collected a few credentials along the way to show that my personal mentorship is something of extreme value." - I don't think anything was said by anyone here to contradict that. I too am a quite special - nay, genetically, intellectually and ideologically unique, I think - human being and I also provide services that add value to people's lives, both in my profession and in my 'extra-curricular' activities.

I think the issue is, Robin, that what you provide, albeit a 'one stop shop' is not necessarily unique and that perhaps you need to target and focus your selling pitch.

Regards,

Joe"

reply by Robin Good on 21/07/03 - 09:47

Dear Joe,

thank you so much for stretching yourself a bit and helping our reader friends get some good critical questioning and some alternative viewpoints on what I am offering. I think that what you are providing is of value both to them and to me.

Let me try to give a little more information on the correct points that you have just raised in your last reply:

You write:

"Social activists online are rare beasts..." - ummm....not really. Where do I start? What do you define as a social activist? Let's keep it broad. I didn't know what to look for so I just typed in 'social activist networks' in to Google. Here are a few relevant references from the 88000 pages returned by Google. Now, I KNOW that a lot of these will be irrelevant, but....these are meta-lists, pointing to lists of activist groups / individuals.

http://community.web.ca/index.shtml
Activist_Networks
http://www.unaids.org/links/activist.asp"

Joe, let's set the references correctly so that we can be talking about the SAME thing. A social activist, in the vision of the Communication Agents Initiative, is an individual who is highly skilled in publishing and communicating personal messages, and who leverages with high skill a mix of present-day digital technologies to not only pass information but to directly address and facilitate change in one or more of the Areas for Change defined.

I do not see among the URLs you have submitted anyone organization or individual that resembles in any way what I am describing above.

Let's make matters simpler. Let's look at the social activists that have ALREADY come on board in this project. What prompted them to see things differently from you? How come do they find so much value in this?

Here is my personal answer: each one of them had been a great social activist, and a great mover of information to other activists via email and/or Web sites. These people have been doign real activist job and have invested much time and resources over many years to defend the interests and freedom of choice of consumers particularly in the health area.

When I came along and made the offer to these guys they did not see any immediate advantage or benefit in jumping on my vision for Communication Agents. So, I offered them to try me out first, and then to assess themselves if what I was offering was the same as what you describe achievable with no money and with a skilled friend who will land a hand when needed.

I am sure you have read what they have written. If not please check these true testimonials from them.

"In addition there's a wealth of academic research there. I myself in my IE Favourites lists have several online social activist groups, including a self-help philanthropy group in the US (www.modestneeds.org) a sites about the LETS system (http://www.gmlets.u-net.com/) and a further site helping supply balanced information and support about the plight of women in post-war Afghanistan. I've assisted a developer work with the last site, just as I have, in the last 10 years, aided and abetted numerous social groups with technical support, hosting, etc. all free of charge - for the love of the cause."

The Communication Agents Initiative wants to empower individuals, not groups. You may find this silly, superficial or even counter productive. That is OK. I believe that the potential to change things today is effectively in the hands of such individuals. In turn they may swarm, group, flock, network and flashmob to obtain and bring about greater effects and attention that they could do by themselves.

It is indeed wonderful that you have chosen to invest your time and resources to help such well-meant organizations and groups and on top of this that you have done this for free. I myself have been providing a enormous wealth of information for free to all people that may have needed and not just to those of my liking. Please check the amount of free valuable know-how, information, tols and techniques available for free at:

Master New Media

MasterView International

So it doesn't look like as I have just woke up thinking of squeezing out some money from those very ones that I have been helping throughout, knowing well that this very group is possibly one with the least financial freedom and with the smallest survival budget.

I have simply realized that if I wanted to give them something that could MAKE A REAL DIFFERENCE I could have not done so without finding a way to get the expenses paid for.

Now, I invite you once again to look at the work of my first three baby Communication Agents, at work only since 7-weeks, and to tell me WHERE there are other social activists doing something equivalent in terms of focus, style, format, reach and depth. Please provide us with some tangible and comparable online activists.

But Joe, let's also look well beyond the surface:

1) I have offered to the ones that do not have the financial capability to support this to be completely sponsored by those who instead can. Is this irrelevant to you?

2) I, unlike most of the organizations you refer to, I am and will be keeping a completely transparent accounting showing exactly where all of the money that I receive is being spent.

Therefore, if I spend money to allow you to learn things that are not done by others, which are reserved to a technically-savvy elite and if I take good care of showing to you methods and tools that are not even well understood by online marketers I believe I am offering something different than what you have envisioned.

Learning is what this people pay for. This is what I provide to them, along with the a number of great facilities to support their hands-on learning path. If a $ 130/month learning fee that supplies with a whole command center to effectively act for social change, while being part of an intimate and unique network of highly talented individuals is an unfair offer, than what do you call Chris Pirillo's $97/month to be part of his discussion forum Brain Trust?

Have I the right to offer a professional learning opportunity, that anyone has yet to show not being unique for what it looks to me as a RIDICOLOUS price?

You wrote:
"Ever since the publication of books like 'The Aquarian Conspiracy' there have been social networks with purpose forming and exploiting the technologies available, without the assistance of mediators. If people needed techie help, they would come to sympathisers with the knowldege required."

Thanks for saying this Peter.

I am not a mediator.

I do not provide "techie" help.

I wish to help people who do not give a shit about how technology works and why this protocol is better than this other one. These people want to communicate and learn in the most effective way possible. This is what I specialize in and this the know-how I provide to them.

Can you please point to me somebody else who does this?

"I think the issue is, Robin, that what you provide, albeit a 'one stop shop' is not necessarily unique and that perhaps you need to target and focus your selling pitch."

Peter, you maybe very right about this claim, but unless you show us by way of real examples HOW I am not unique, the negative prejudices maybe only born out of your perception that there is nothing really to pay for here. If that is the case, and if you are honestly curious to reveal some truth for others by way of this discussion, would you kindly contact by email, or post a comment to one of the pioneer Communication Agents and check your point of view with one representing the actual interested group?
Chris Gupta, Share The Wealth
Sepp Hasslberger, Health Supreme

Wih my best and warmest regards,

Robin GoodIdeas, Tools and Resources for Communication Agents
http://www.masternewmedia.org/
reply to this comment edit

reply by Joe Pritchard
on 21/07/03 - 07:18

"Thanks for the reply, Robin.

I've encountered many individuals and groups (for good AND 'evil') who communicate effectively using e-mail and web sites without any facilillitator in the middle. People just go out and get a web account set up then learn enough HTML to publicise their message.

Look at local societies and clubs, web sites for large organisations like Greenpeace, the 'black' websites set up to support the activites of terrorist groups like Al-Queada, etc. When I was more active in social causes the approach we took when requiring a web site was to go and get some space and a domain name. That was it - we regarded that knowing enough HTML to put a page together was necessary for us to communicate, just as knowing how to use a duplicating machine was essential for communication in earlier 'non-electronic' times.

At worse, and I'm sure that this isn't the case, you'll be seen as effectively acting as a 'vanity' publisher for people. As it stands I'm still not sure of the added value that you provide for the subscription fee - perhaps that's an area for focus?

Regards,

Joe"

Can Communication Agents Organize And Act?

Applicant Luigi Bertuzzi aka ZigZag writes in one of his comments:

As you say Robin, I am preparing to send in my Communication Agent applicationhowever, I have indicated that my decision is

subject to the outcome of convenient arrangements

because, if I may borrow a statement from your post on The Raise of Emergentism:

Having seen first-hand, many tmes, the power of networked groups, I hold out not hope, but a task, to organize and act, no matter who you are and no matter what it takesUnfortunately, we are now experiencing a paradox, because holding out such a task is far more difficult today, in the age of networks and collaborative (or social) software, than it was thirty years ago, in the early days of computing, before networking existed at all.

To which I have promptly responded:

"It really sounds all fine to me.

Your points are right and well taken but my view on what is taking place offers a slightly different point of view than the one you so skilfully outline.

Small groups, self-defining shared-ethos (a-la-Bala http://www.ryze.com/go/Bala) networks of like-minded individuals that utilize communication tools to meet, collaborate and address specific issues, do not need to go through great organizational work efforts (times are too fast-changing now to be able to plan organizational frameworks at this level of granularity that can be better and more adaptable than the ones naturally forming around issues and events to address).

They self-organize.

It is also true that groups are also their own very worst enemy (http://shirky.com/writings/group_enemy.html) and in that respect key principles protecting group cohesion should be embedded in the loose organizational framework to guarantee stability and extended lifetime to it. These may include:

a) some fundamental group ethics,

b) a clear and well stated mission,

c) a well defined picture of our enemies (as we have several specific ones to address), and

d) complete transparency for how our operations are being run.

That weblogs, blogs and in general the use of new media tools and online technologies is greatly misunderstood is also true. This is a too great opportunity we should not let go by so easily. Nonetheless the ocean of blogs, wikis and other apparently "non-professional" independent publishing tools may apparently clog relevancy from becoming more accessible online, this is like saying that proliferation of soft drinks may make a quality wine brand become useless or hard to find. Nonsense. Or better yet, quite the contrary.

That is:
The more vast and pervasive the ocean of irrelevant conversations, blogs, posts and comments, the more easily relevant become those few, highly linked, cited and articles (on blogs or not on blogs) that deserve the authority given to them by other readers.

That visibility and authority is naturally awarded to them by info searchers, readers and by other online information sources linking or citing them. That is if you have any value, within topics to be dynamically identified, you will show up in search results.

The Communication Agents Initiative is related to blogs as much as Ferrari is related to helmets. Yes, we are now using a popular weblog publishing technology to empower each Communication Agent to achieve is ambitious goals, but that says little of all the related and complementary methods, tactics and other technologies that, if well used, can make indeed a Communication Agent a uniquely powerful agent of social change.

Let me state this clearly and officially, once and for all:
Communication Agents are not bloggers.

I do not share the common view that if you use Blogger.com, MovableType or any other weblogging technology what you produce whit it is one, predetermined product/content item.

With this technology the outcome does not have to be personal diary as we see on 90% of the blogs around. With what you call blog technology (and I would better refer to as Personal Publishing System in line with MT original vision), I have already produced a successful online catalogue, an online shop, an information clearinghouse, and also the three pioneer Communication Agents Web sites, which while incorporating the features of popular online bloggers, have a unique approach, focus and depth in their publishing efforts.

As a matter of fact I openly invite you to find other online weblogs that address anyone of my clearly outlined Areas for Change in an independent fashion and through the effective use of such technologies.

There are very few, next to none. The ones that I have identified are mostly linked in the Robin Sources blogroll that you can find at: http://www.masternewmedia.org/

Re you worries about what it takes to talk to large organizations when it comes to utilize these tools and appropriate team mentality to use them, you do not need to be any clearer.

I live the problem on my skin as a key consultant of some large international organizations operating in the fields of research, development and education. They are scared as shit of what is happening and they are holding very tight to their few, so hardly conquered fix beliefs. They are staying top-down, they are not opening their ears.

But you know what?

Their people, individuals armed of anger, exhausted by too much top-down exerted control and censorship are taking back the initiative and are speaking up.

And when they do, they have a profound effect.

Just like that person leaving first at a party and making everyone else suddenly leave too. They also have a profound effect because they rapidly link-up and synergise with other like-minded people who have already been moving in the same direction.

Information is shared and updated and higher more complex issues can be addressed.

I am not scared, discouraged or put down by your open comments. They represent the position where everyone is at.

My intuition tells me that this the correct road to take and my data shows me that effective change can be brought about through a new level of communication born out of highly independent, visionary individuals.

Luigi, while I gently return to you the opportunity for a little break to reflect on your points, please see how tuned-in, qualified, skilled and motivated you are in addressing one or more of the issues so clearly outlined in my Areas for Change.

The road ahead is not easy nor downhill, but it is a road.

It is not paved but it is visible.

It is not on the map, but there are people who know and have long studied about it.

The road is there to be taken for those who have prepared themselves for this.

This is a mission that takes some real balls and large shoulders.

I would suggest reflection on well pondered steps for all involved.

Robin Good
Ideas, Tools and Resources To Get There
http://www.masternewmedia.org/

July 21, 2003 in Critical Questions | Permalink | TrackBack

July 20, 2003

Are You Missing Something?

Not long ago Joe Pritchard has placed a fair comment on Suhit Anantula weblog page at Ecademy
Am I missing something?

"Whilst very noble, the activities supported here look like the sort of site that socially aware networkers have been doing for the last decade in one form or another - paper, book, online, whatever.

It's very interesting, and I see the 'technical support' angle as being useful, but surely CAs are just another name for authors with things to say?"

Joe

Here is my reply to Joe:

"Joe, thank you for good critical comment. This is the type of questions I need to make sure that my offer is properly understood as I am refining the terms and wording through which I convey it.

Indeed the Communication Agents Initiative is NOT looking for authors "with things to say"."

"I am looking for uniquely skilled communicators that have something strong to say and something greater to do in one or more of the Areas for Change that compose our first reference Manifesto. I am looking for what many would call a present-day online social activist.

Joe, I have looked far and wide on the Internet and I have not been to find but a handful of individuals doing what I am describing. If you know anyone of those that are not already listed on our blogrolls, then we may like very much you to introduce a few more to us.

I am not looking for writers with something to say, I am looking for talented communicators who want to take on the opportunity given by today's rapid change, communication tools and fertile world social awareness, to initiate effective campaigns, actions and design of solution frameworks that allow non governmental forces to create alternative and parallel infrastructures to deal and solve major human issues.

All the best,"

Robin Good
Ideas, Tools and Resources for Communication Agents
http://www.masternewmedia.org/

July 20, 2003 in Critical Questions | Permalink | TrackBack

 

Powered by Robin Good