[Harp-L] Re: Butterfield e-Petition

["Jonathan Metts" <jonathan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

To fjm: Sorry for the lack of harp content, but if the list is going to be 
filled with status updates on the petitions ("We're up to xx names now!"), I 
feel there should be a voice of reason to put the effort into context.

To Jason: I take no offense; you know I love you, man.  But if there are so 
many people here willing and able to be active in an effort like this, I 
want to encourage them to direct their energy in a more useful manner in 
order to accomplish what this petition sets out to do.

To everyone else: The allure and futility of e-petitions is explained in 
some detail here:
http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/petition/internet.htm
Snopes is a fantastic website that does a lot of research to debunk Internet 
myths and scams.  (The myth here being that online petitions can be 
effective.)  Anytime you read something in a chain email, it's a good bet 
that Snopes has already posted an article about it.

To sum up their points:
- Paper petitions can be effective if narrowly defined and directed to a 
specific person of influence, usually a politician.
- Online petitions are not effective because the signatures can easily be 
forged or duplicated through automated means.
- Petitions are alluring because they make you feel that you are making a 
difference despite investing a minimal amount of effort in the campaign.
- Any form of communication that requires more effort, such as writing a 
letter or even making a phone call to the responsible party, carries far 
more weight than signing a petition, especially an online petition.

It's good to hear that Butterfield's family has a hard copy petition and is 
pursuing other means as well.  If you really care about Butterfield being 
inducted, I would suggest that you contact the society and ask how you can 
get involved with one of these other efforts.

Jonathan Metts