For some time now my friend (and encouraging mentor) Colin Rule has been a contributing blogger at ODR News Blog, part of the web site for the Center for Information Technology and Dispute Resolution at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
Recently Colin began publishing a blog of his own hosted at Stanford Law School’s Center for Internet and Society. Colin’s blog offers perspective and commentary on conflict resolution, civil discourse, politics, international relations, and, yes, technology and the Internet. You can join Colin’s conversation by clicking here.
Speaking of conversation, conflict resolution of course is all about promoting dialogue. One of Colin’s recent posts led me to a happy discovery: ChangeThis, a web site born of a radical and hopeful idealism: to virally transmit ideas through a culture medium of community, respect, and dialogue.
Recognizing that “the best discussions in science, medicine, business and politics have always been the civil ones”, ChangeThis publishes what it calls manifestos—proposals for change which serve as “a reasoned, rational call to action, supported by logic and facts”. The goal is to provide a forum for “the rational and thoughtful arguments that help people change their minds to a more productive point of view.” In the egalitarian spirit with which ChangeThis was founded, anyone is welcome to submit ideas for a manifesto.
Among the manifestos you will find at ChangeThis are “The Life Cycle of the Creative Soul“, “How to speak a teen’s language, even if you’re not one“, “Community Greens: Green Infrastructure and Community Revitalization“, and “Why Smart People Defend Bad Ideas“. And bloggers who are having trouble finding meaning in what they do should read “Going Home“, a manifesto which envisions bloggers as part of something revolutionary and global–as mediators of Internet conversation and connection:
At the center of conversation is the blog. At the heart of the blog is the authentic voice…Our voice is so strong that it can be heard around the entire globe. We are amazed to find others far away who can hear us and who have the same tone…Community begins to form…
(Looking for more connection through the medium of the web? Visit this post of mine from earlier this year.)
by Diane Levin on December 26, 2005
in Seasonal
Warning: The following blog post has absolutely nothing to do with mediation, conflict resolution, or negotiation. I’m posting it because it’s funny, it’s seasonal, and it’s a great example of the capacity of the human imagination to transcend its bounds in pursuit of subversiveness.
While perusing the latest edition of the Boston Phoenix, I stumbled across an article with the irresistible title: “Hacking Santa“, about Tulsa, Oklahoma, resident Josh McCormick. Josh was shopping in his local Wal-Mart in search of something to hack for submission to “You Can’t Show That in Tulsa!”, an avant-garde art show, when he suddenly had an epiphany there in the aisle of Wal-Mart: “One item out of the entire store screamed ‘hack me’ more than anything else. The $49.84 animatronic Santa Claus.”
Josh purchased the five-foot-tall “Animated Singing Santa” (“this singin’ Santa’s head turns, and he swings his hips while moving his mouth to the words of the song”), took it home, and hacked it. Instead of singing “Jingle Bells”, Josh’s Santa now utters phrases like “I can give you free stuff because I skimp on elf health care. Ho, ho, ho!”
Why hack Santa? As Josh explains on his web site,
Aside from an interesting hack, I actually had an artistic statement for this piece. “Who controls Santa Claus?” was the question I had hoped that viewers would walk away with. Today, it is the corporations who mass produce items (such as this) and media companies who tell stories. They have the power to redefine ‘public characters’ such as Santa and add or change their mythology. They do not directly own, but they control our shared mythology. But what are their goals? What biases do they have? And what limits their behavior? These are questions this piece asks.
You can read about Josh’s act of corporate subversion here, which includes instructions on hacking your own Santa.
Blawg Review, the weekly carnival of law blogs creatively hosted each week by a different blogger, has announced its first annual Blawg Review Awards.
Congratulations to all those who were singled out for recognition for their unique contributions to the law blog world. (A high-five to my friend Bob Ambrogi for getting the nod for Best Legal Podcast, sharing the honor with his Coast-to-Coast cohost J. Craig Williams.)
Discussion is an exchange of knowledge; argument is an exchange of ignorance.
~ Robert Quillen
Negotiators, economists, game theorists, and mediators alike are probably familiar with Pareto optimality, which envisions the reallocation of resources among individuals so that the outcome for at least one individual can be improved without leaving anyone else worse off.
Here’s an interesting reflection on the recent New York City transit workers strike, from blogger Mike Goelzer, who wonders whether strikers and the city could have achieved Pareto optimality — avoiding disruption to commuters and loss to New York businesses while enabling the city and union to continue negotiating.
Goelzer links to “A Better Way to Go on Strike,” an essay originally published in the Wall Street Journal back in ’97 which proposes a creative way to address labor disputes while reducing the costs and collateral damage which traditional strikes result in.
(Thanks to Amit Gupta’s blog for this link.)
