We Should Be Initiators, Not Just Participants

In his book, "Here Comes Everybody," Clay Shirky comments that after the initial creation phase, groups or ideas sometimes take off and can change the world.  In his Wikipedia example he explains that one person merely has to stub out an article to get the process going.  Eventually, through minimal efforts of many and the large efforts of a few, the article can then become robust and lengthy.  Shirky goes on to say that a key benefit of technology is the ability to "lower the hurdles to doing something in the first place." (p. 181)  These ideas got me thinking about initiators, people that help others join in just by starting a discussion.  Personally, I know that I am more likely to join a discussion that has already been started than start one myself.  I think that behavior is typical of the average person as well.  Great responsibility then lies with those who start discussions because they enable everyone else to participate.  As I came to this realization I also realized the strong connection it had to the LDS Church's doctrine of agency.  When we contribute to a discussion someone else started we are being acted upon but when we can be the initiator, we are acting and using our agency as it was intended.  If we have something worthwhile to say the chances are there are others who agree with us.  The tools are there to say it and who knows, we may provide the platform for people to join in, participate, accomplish something great, and even change the world.

Something I learned from "The Cuckoo's Egg"

Many people have criticized the government's monitoring and analyzing of email metadata, questioning the authority that the government has to gather the private information contained in this data.  The general idea seems to be that the government was all wrong in its course of action.  Too often critics only criticize without offering any useful ideas of how things could have been done more effectively.  Cliff Stoll was one of these critics but as he worked closely with individuals from various government agencies he realized that their motives and desired outcomes were similar to his.  This led him to abandon many of his criticisms and work towards a common solution.  Similarly, I think if those criticizing the NSA and other government agencies focused more on the common goal of national safety they could move past useless criticisms and instead contribute to a greater dialog of reforming current data mining practices. It is more productive for all people to collaborate and build a better system than to merely criticize the current system.  Recognizing the similar motives and desired outcomes of those in government agencies is the critical first step in that collaboration process.