Civil Beat is a place of lively discussion on many topics. But we know it can be hard to keep up with all the different discussions. We know you’re busy. So I’ve gathered together some “must-read” comments from recent days.
I’m so impressed by what I learn in the discussions. For example:
- From Keith Ishida, in response to an article by Chad Blair about a summit on how to help homeless children:
If you look at the numbers we actually have fewer homeless children (as measured as a proportion of the total homeless population) than other cities on the mainland. It was once explained to me that the reason for this has to do with our values and tradition of hanai. When the family goes homeless and is forced onto the beach someone else, grandpa, auntie, cousin, friend, steps in and takes in the keiki, and the family, in an act of sacrifice gives up the keiki to be cared for by others while they get their act together. No matter what, everyone works to take care of the kids first. Its one of those things I think that make Hawaii unique. That being said, one homeless child is one too much. To see original comment.
- Matt Winter responded to our coverage of Senate Bill 2045, the human trafficking bill on Gov. Linda Lingle‘s desk.
Today’s Skilling (Enron) decision from the Supreme Court shows what can happen if an overly broad or vague law is passed and enforced. In its decision, the Supreme Court vacated some of Mr. Skilling’s convictions, finding that the law, he was convicted under, was unconstitutionally vague.
This is exactly the worry that prosecutors, law enforcement, and some in the legal community have about SB 2045. A law with great an noble intentions, yet flawed, can do the opposite of its intent. A great start isn’t enough — the law has to be constitutional. Because when liberty is at stake, a defendant should rightly challenge a bad law.
Mr. Skilling’s successful challenge should be an example of the types of challenges that defendant’s will make to any convictions under the current version of SB 2045.
By the way, if you want to learn more about the Skilling decision, here’s a New York Times story.
- Civil Beat Publisher and CEO Pierre Omidyar gave a response to a question we often hear about our comments. I think it’s important to share it again, along with an example of the responses we received to what he wrote.
People often ask us why Civil Beat doesn’t put comments beneath each article, and instead requires comments to take place in Discussions that continue for weeks at a time. I thought I would share our thinking in designing our discussions this way.
The reason is simple, but you may not completely agree with our thinking: we believe the most fruitful discussions take place in the context of an overall topic, rather than in response to a single article in a series of articles covering the same topic. We need to do a better job of announcing in the discussions whenever new information is posted relating to that discussion, and your feedback that our discussions can be clunky serve as good reminders that we have to keep improving.
We realize that we are probably unique in this respect as compared to other news websites. At the same time, the way our articles and discussions relate to each other is also unique. For example, today we posted four articles related to teacher compensation. If each one had its own comments section, it would be hard to have a common conversation about the broader subject.
There are obviously pros and cons to each approach. We appreciate your patience and willingness to experiment with us as we try to develop new ways to have conversations about civic matters.
- Lika Jordan provided a thoughtful response, the entirety of which you can read here.
It still seems to me that threaded discussions, wherein one could leave a short response to a specific post or comment, would make it better for those of us who check in for 5-10 minutes from time to time. Not everyone has time to sit quietly and give the full attention it takes to digest an article and compose a thoughtful response. We could still contribute, however, in a more targeted way, with threaded discussions.
My hope is that membership will increase even among those who are not able to make time to enter into the discussion very often. Maybe some people will see supporting this effort less as subscribing to a news daily and more as supporting a social good like the symphony, museums, HPR or PBS.
We’re listening.
- On the Akaka Bill, about which we published a topic page and an article this week, came this heartfelt and thoughtful response from Alan Sarhan.
The two models of recognition most often mentioned, Native American and Native Alaskan, are, like democracy, the worst methods except for all the others that have been tried. As a haole who is disturbed that the overthrow of the monarchy and takeover has never addressed, I can support sovereignty but that’s really a non-starter at this point and any conceivable point in the future; if the momentary rush of standing on principle is all you want, go ahead and call for it. If you want to seriously do something, I think the Akaka bill is flexible enough and will at least start the $#@* process. Here we are more than a hundred years later and we haven’t taken any serious steps. That’s a shame and needs to change.
I hope this gives a flavor of the discussion on Civil Beat.
