Hmmmm. I read the piece and have a mixed reaction. On the one hand, I agree with the first point that Dean may have "accidentally created a movement (where what counts is believing) instead of a campaign (where what counts is voting)." My interpretation of this statement is that those who believe do so strongly but their numbers are alas insufficient in our Western system where democracy gets reduced to showing up at a polling system every fours years or so. However, the remainder of the piece explicitly shifts to blaming Dean supporters for not bothering to get their butts out in the cold to vote. Even in my limited following of this story from newspaper (Globe and Mail) and radio (CBC) in Toronto, I have read or heard nothing to suggest that Dean supporters who were eligible voters in these caucuses didn't do so. In fact, I thought Dean supporters shipped in to help rally the troops (okay, bad choice of metaphor for the only real anti-war candidate). Can anyone clarify? Rhiannon Rhiannon Bury, Ph.D. Women's Studies University of Waterloo Waterloo, Ontario Canada rbury@uwaterloo.ca Barry Wellman wrote:

Clary Shirky has a nice essay on the Howard Dean and Iowa situation, that fits nicely with what Chuck Tilly and I have posted here in complementary ways:

http://www.corante.com/many/archives/2004/01/26/is_social_software_bad_for_t...

Barry _____________________________________________________________________

Barry Wellman Professor of Sociology NetLab Director wellman at chass.utoronto.ca http://www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

Centre for Urban & Community Studies University of Toronto 455 Spadina Avenue Toronto Canada M5S 2G8 fax:+1-416-978-7162 To network is to live; to live is to network _____________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________ Air-l mailing list Air-l@aoir.org http://www.aoir.org/mailman/listinfo/air-l