From: Tom Atlee
To: undisclosed list
Subject: How should we respond to "Y2K Community Conversations"?
Date: Tuesday, May 25, 1999 1:19 AM

Dear friends,

The President's Y2K Council has announced its "Y2K Community Conversations" program. You'll find the announcement at: http://www.y2k.gov/new/0524PRLS.htm The text is below.

The Community Conversations page is at: http://www.y2k.gov/community/ It includes information on, and directions for ordering, a "Tool Kit" for organizing these conversations. (While the tool kit is biased towards the government's perspective, there is plenty of room for creating the kind of meeting that will serve community groups, IF they take the initiative. If you want some creative ideas for more creative processes to use for these conversations, check out "A toolbox of processes for Y2K community work" http://www.co-intelligence.org/y2k_processes.html -- especially categories 3 and 4. )

Also below is the Council's Y2K Community Conversations Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) Q&A sheet.

Y2K organizer Mick Winter casts a jaundiced eye on the FAQ. He points out the following:

The main page states: "People are looking for straight talk about the Y2K readiness of their own local communities." Here is what the FAQ considers to be "straight talk": The federal government will be fine, utilities will be fine, banks will be fine, airlines will be fine, elevators and VCRs will be fine, and three days of food and water are always a good thing to have around the house. Guess that takes care of everything, doesn't it?

I cannot support an effort that presents such a rosy and out-of-touch-with-reality view. The logical conclusion from the information in this FAQ is that there is no need to even hold the Community Conversations. This program, as it appears, synthesizes everything that has been harmful to date - particularly the groundless reassurances from government and corporate spokesmen that everything is fine, and the need for no more than a 3-day supply of food and water. Notice also: "Stockpiling and panic buying could create economic difficulties". Not even "hoarding", just "stockpiling".

The federal government is at least 3-5 months behind the Y2K-aware communities in this country. I had hopes for this program. I have them no longer.

While I agree with Mick's decrying the rosy picture painted by the Council's FAQ, I think it may be premature to deliver the last rites for all good possibilities for this program at this point. These federally-sanctioned Community Conversations will soon be a fact of life, one that we can fight, use, work with or ignore. Our choice of how to interact with them will probably make a difference. (For example, if a community group doesn't like the Council's FAQ, they might pass it out at the first Conversation along with a note that says: "This is the official federal government's version of a Y2K FAQ. Many people hold diverse opinions about it. We're holding a contest for a Y2K FAQ that is best for our community. You are invited to send us your suggested revisions and additions." And then hand out both FAQs at the next conversation....]

I think that any local Y2K group might consider having a special brainstorming session about how they could work to shape these Conversations to best meet their community's needs. Each community is different, and will be presented with different possibilities. An alliance of government and utilities in one town could work together -- under the auspices of these Conversations -- to hide utility Y2K problems. On the other hand, an alliance of community groups and government in another town could put powerful pressure on utilities to give real, useful data about their status. I know communities where both of these scenarios are possible.

In addition to the frustrating statements such as those cited by Mick above, the council has provided some USEFUL statements. For example:

The council has said: "Y2K Community Conversations... give people an opportunity to hear from key service providers on the status of efforts to prepare computers for the date change and the work that remains to be done. The gatherings also enable local citizens to raise concerns they may have about the Y2K problem and work with service providers to identify areas where additional community preparation and planning are needed."

And Council Chair John Koskinen has said: "Our greatest domestic risks for Year 2000-related failures are at the local level. From power and phone companies to banks and water utilities, Americans want to know how the important local services upon which they rely may be affected by computers' ability to process the century date change. Y2K Community Conversations can help people better understand the progress that has been made, what the risks are, and what precautions may be appropriate in light of those risks....Our goal is not to cheerlead or create a false sense of security. Our goal is for participants to share factual information about what's been done, what remains to be done, and what additional actions a community should take as a result."

My own suggestion is to take such USABLE statements of the Council and Koskinen and USE THEM FOR ALL THEY ARE WORTH. Use them to give legitimacy to our efforts. Use them as a crow bar to pry open reluctant officials (with the help of the press, where necessary and possible). Use them to wake people up. Take them at face value and show up at these Conversations with insistent, articulate voices that will not go away (voices that always start from a place of great civility, and proceed with whatever tone is necessary to ensure that the needs of the community are recognized and met).

Isn't it time to take Koskinen at his word? He didn't HAVE to say the statements above. Let's hold him to these very good sentiments. And then let's see how far we can run with them. Let's assume (for now) that Koskinen is a frightened ally. Let's assume that he really WANTS communities to be prepared and just doesn't know how to do it without creating panic -- except like this. Let's show him what the next steps should be, and do our best to weave the different sectors of our communities into something that just might work. If WE don't know what the next steps should be, we can try to make the Conversations into a real exploratory dialogue. In any case, we can be creative, energetic and civic minded. And then see how he and the Council respond.

There isn't a lot of time. We need every ally, every tool we can get. We shouldn't stop what we're doing, but let's see what this new development has to offer to our communities, if we give it a chance and insist on it being of real service. We can participate strongly, without being co-opted. We can make ourselves visible enough that we can't be sidelined. "We can build the road as we travel." And we can always switch our strategies, when and where it makes sense.

Let's share information on what we do with these Community Conversations, or what we think might be done. I'm not the best clearinghouse for this sort of information, but I'm wondering if y2kcommunity.org or coalition2000 or wild2k or millennium salons or some other site might be willing to create a dialogue space for local organizers to discuss this topic, so all can learn from each other's experiences and ideas.

This is Y2K. Wasting resources is not an option. We can't throw apples away just because they have a few marks and bugs on them. Let's give a bite and see what they taste like first. If we don't like the apples we've just been given, there's always the compost heap...

Coheartedly,

Tom

PS: Coalition 2000 is listed as a resource in the Conversations Guide Book. THAT is another thing we can and should use to keep this process real.

PPS: As far as we know, the majority of cities, towns and counties in the US do NOT have Y2K groups, and many of the groups that do exist are VERY small (one or two semi-active people). I feel that in those places even a party-line Conversation is better than nothing. I may be wrong.

-- Critt Jarvis (middleground@critt.com), May 25, 1999

Answers

Critt,

So that's what ELITE INFLUENCE was meant by in the Navy War College materials!

Sincerely, Stan Faryna

-- Stan Faryna (info@giglobal.com), May 25, 1999.

Critt,

After getting the latest transcript of Community Conversations Press Conference, I definitely felt that the tone was waaay to rosey(No Problems Y2K all will be taken care of). I was thinking of posting it on my town y2k site but it would defeat the effort that my Y2K committee has been expending getting the people to wake up and prepare.

Do you feel that by participating in this that we may be able to influence the whole by contributing our own views (kind of like hiding some leaven in the meal)?

I have been very active throughout the state helping people to prepare in communities that have no Y2K group. I just wonder how much we (the yourdonites) will be able to help moderate the tone without having things evolve into the kind of in-fighting that we see here.

Steve Levin Coordinator Warwick Y2K Committee

-- Steve Levin (WarwickY2k@full-access.com), May 25, 1999.