solarbird | (Reply)

From: (Anonymous)

apologies for anonymous posting, but sometimes the message requires it if the writer is to retain any capacity for free action in the matter.

1. as you yourself have noted, you have a fair level of silent readership. one might guess that organisers are more likely to stay silent than would activists: it is easy enough to lose effectiveness by conflating the messenger with the message (to be fair, you have maintained good separation there).

2. following from the above, there is no immediate way to track the onward movement of ideas which you, or others of like intent and action, may have raised via your journalling; not all effective readers will mention sources, as much for the protection of the sources as anything else.

3. points 1 and 2 above are of course now largely moot in this post-FISA mess era.

4. notwithstanding point 3, please consider (in the words of this anonymous source at least) that your gathering, collation and presentation of information has been useful; you are now here hearing this at least this one time.

5. so, in addition to the four possibilities you mention, I would suggest a fifth one, that readers (at least some of the ones who seldom comment) are taking the information away and acting on it. You will not know to what extent this is true.

...considered sending this backchannel, but that might sidestep the possibility of catalysing further discussion, whether here or elsewhere.