Recent searches
Search options
Administered by:
Having been active in political lobbying for many, many years has teached me a few lessons, that might seem weird to others.
Whenever a new proposal or plan pops up, I go into risk calculation mode. How can this be abused? How can this be subverted? Is it written that way because there is a specific interest that wants the exact opposite? This is a normal pattern for me. I calculate these risks and put a probability with them. And I start preparing plans to counter negative outcomes.
The fundamental rule is simple: "No surprises". Whatever happens in the process, it should be anticipated and a counter plan or argument should be in place.
It sounds negative, but it actually is a lot of fun. And gets you respect points from political opponents. They work the same. Just make sure your plans are easy to communicate and hide the complexity of the thought process. This is how you win or at least know what is actually happening. There will always be a next time :)
This approach works beyond political lobbying. But it can also be very destructive. I make sure I always focus on positive language and positive, inclusive plans. Right now I see a lot of destructive approaches being used out there, mainly by conservative forces. Nothing really new, they've always been that way, but in the last 2-3 years it's being used in more aggressive ways. Just an observation, though.
Here's a very concrete example. Meta/Facebook will soon have an #ActivityPub based connection for Instagram. The probability for P92/Project 92/Project Barcelona is high. What will this mean? You can follow Insta accounts here. Good! Progress! Or?
Will Meta use this to inject ads? Will that be optional? Will they support real ActivityPub or will they create their own interpretation?
And what does it mean for the rest of the #Fediverse?