[free-sklyarov] Re: A Modest Proposal: the opposing viewpoint

[Alex Fabrikant]

Jim,

I understand very well how difficult it is to maintain a site as
comprehensive as yours. You guys have been doing an outstanding job, and
are continuing to maintain the single best resource for all of the
thousands of people involved in this movement. While I'm unfortunately
unable to volunteer for a writing position, I guess I will take my own
advice and put up a rudimentary page'o'links (if nothing else) on my own
site that I will eventually develop into a minimal "opposing viewpoint"
page; this way, all I would ask for is a link from your site. I will send
you a URL as soon as I put up the page.

To everyone else on the list, my call for rebuttals still stands; send
them my way.


On Thu, 2 Aug 2001, Jim Youll wrote:

> Alex, your points are well taken. However, it is one thing to wish
> something to be and another to muster the resources to pull it off.
> 
> 1. I need ONE GOOD WRITER to keep up a "CURRENT SUMMARY" document of approximately 1000 words, plus a timeline and background section. Think of the "Encyclopaedia Dmitry" and you'll understand what needs to be created.
> 
> 2. This document can be the first step toward providing an "opposing viewpoint" because it would necessarily cover the law and the other side of the issue.
> 
> The cluster of people who want to help (thank you everyone) is heavily technical. But nothing about this is not a technical problem, it's a communication problem.  We worked out most of the tech crap already (with some lingering stuff that the volunteers who've already contacted me can handle) Speaking slightly in frustration here, it's evident that "writing is boring" and "writing is hard work" are still mantras for a lot of people.
> 
> But that's no reason not to learn how to talk to people. And yes, writing is hard work. Research can be boring. Proofreading is tedious. But if you do it right, you get a shot at changing the world.
> 
> 3.
> WRITERS AND EDITORS STILL NEEDED, experience preferred (because I don't have time myself to edit)
> 
> SITE PRODUCER NEEDED, preferably someone with experience putting together complex sites, so that I can assume more of an editorial and content oversight role, and work less on production even though it's "fun". sort of.
> 
> Contact publisher at freesklyarov.org with vitals
> 
> 
> 
> 
> At 5:08 PM -0700 8/1/01, Alex Fabrikant wrote:
> >Having by now talked to several people who do not agree with our arguments
> >against DoJ/FBI's prosecution of Dmitry, it now occurs to me that we could
> >improve our public image substantially by providing people new to our
> >cause with full access to the opposing viewpoint. Personally, on several
> >prior occasions when I first heard about a political cause on which I was
> >ambivalent, the lack of information from the "other side" on all materials
> >passed out by activists has irritated me to the point of losing all
> >respect for the activist groups and becoming adverse to their cause. I
> >think our case is strong enough that we can display opposing viewpoints
> >and STILL have high hopes for turning most people our way. Providing full
> >access and visibility to the opposing viewpoint, I assert, will do wonders
> >for our credibility in the eyes of the questioning. Furthermore, for any
> >given "opposing viewpoint" item, we can post our counterarguments as
> >well, for an even stronger effect.
> >
> >Hence my proposal, mainly to freesklyarov.org folks, but CC'ed to the
> >list to get people's opinions:
> >
> >1. Add a prominent "Opposing Viewpoints" section, and include links to the
> >   most visible articles which defend Dmitry's arrest. In particular, make
> >   sure you link to the following:
> >
> >   Original complaint:
> >   http://www.usaondca.com/press/assets/applets/2001_07_17_sklyarov.pdf
> >
> >   AAP's press release:
> >   http://www.publishers.org/home/press/index.htm
> >
> >   Inside.com article:
> >   http://www.inside.com/product/product.asp?entity=&pf_ID=E8EECFA3-CBD1-447E-952C-CC16283D266C
> >
> >   (please remind me if there are some other PROMINENT writeups that I
> >    missed; we probably shouldn't waste energy on random messageboard
> >    posts and such; also, it's probably best to link to only the most
> >    "blatantly opposite" writeups rather than semi-neutral ones [like the
> >    "Don't Judge an eBook Case By Its Coverage" article on yahoo])
> >
> >2. If anyone wants to write up a SINGLE well-worded complete rebuttal to
> >   the arguments of any particular item linked in this new section, that
> >   would be particularly helpful (this someone being well-known would also
> >   be a plus, of course, but is not a necessity).
> >
> >Comments/additions?
> >
> >--
> >-alexf
> 
> 

-- 
-alexf