Posted by The Happy Tutor
Let's say we wanted to convene a conversation about the role of philanthropy is a democratic and/or oligarchic society. Let's say we had chapters of a new book or two on philanthropy that could be posted on line, or a series of articles by reputable authors with name recognition. Let's say we also had access to a number of bright and disreputable bloggers, operating under scurrilous pseudonyms. How might we get a conversation going, and keep it going?
- Safe Space by invitation only; a listserv to which people would be invited, no online presence. Rules of participation to include proper names and civility. Tom Munnecke's giving list (now dormant( being a good example of a list like this that worked.
- Wide Open Web Conversation: Whoever comes are the right people. Some appear in masquerade, others in propria persona. As counterfeit money drives out good, so the maskers will drive out many of the more reputable, but decorous philanthropy figures. Thus, the site becomes a demolition of whatever articles or chapters are published, on the general principal that capitalism is bad and things capitalistic are trash, and that any giver who has not consulted the particular set of misfits trashing the article are "undemocractic."
- Open Site with Rules: Invite key figures, set a high tone, moderate comments, have rules about identity and civility.
- Two Sites: One to which people of significance are invited, and with rules about civility, etc; the other an open forum in which the first is trashed.
- Wealth Bondage Charity Ball: Rule being, come in a mask or don't come at all. We don't care to know who you are in the so-called "real world" and not interested in the reputation that might precede you. Stand and deliver; let your views stand or fall on their merits. If you need PR counsel, a lobbyist, a ghostwriter, a cop, or your Momma, one will be provided for you by the Wealth Bondage Staff. The general rule would be, "have fun," and see that others do as well.