PolyDad (polydad) wrote,

Drilling BITs

Okay, it’s 5am and I’ve been up since Zack pinged me at 3:48. Not rude on his part; he’d asked me to ping *him* at 3:30am my time, and I’d agreed, but my phone’s alarm clock works only erratically, and hadn’t gone off this morning. (Properly set; I checked. Want new phone.)

I need to write the Big Important Thing – but I’ve had that need for years, and haven’t been able to effectively act on it yet. Siderea had written (https://siderea.dreamwidth.org/1409042.html#cutid1) on why her style of writing is difficult, and I echo some of her difficulties; since I’m trying to do grand synthesis, a blown attempt usually produces gibberish, not editable rough material. Another pair of tactics I can try are: 1.) writing about why the writing is hard (which you may notice is what I’m doing at the moment), and 2.) doing both simultaneously; using my gibberish-production as a tool to help me write about why it’s not working, or 2b.) use the gibberish-production as a tool to write about new and different tools or approaches I might use to address either writing problem or the subject itself.

Providing background for #1, the BIT is why and how to build a human metaculture, and how one tells one has finished successfully doing so and how it works when it’s done. Since a metaculture is a growing organism, it’ll keep growing on its own after one is done creating it; that’s a design feature, not a bug.

Metacultures are squishy; not only do they come in a lot of different shapes and configurations, an individual metaculture can change shape and configuration without losing cohesiveness, and will often do so if it notices one studying it. (Think of the famous old joke of the primate scientist hurrying out of his subject’s room and then turning to peer through the keyhole, and finding a brown eye staring back at him.) This doesn’t make the descriptive job *impossible*, but it does impose an additional difficulty.

My political work over the last few months is in pursuit of an implementation attempt. Having a readable map of what I’m trying to accomplish could be helpful in doing so. It’s a tricky tool, tho’; most of the politicians and would-be politicians I’ve been talking with are very short-term focused. There’s good utility to that, but we-as-metaculture *also* have to look to our long-term issues. I sympathize with the politicos in their being irritated at someone who seems determined to make their jobs bigger and more difficult.

Some, like John Maxwell (running for Oregon State Representative for District #19), will get it just fine. Others, like Jo Ann Hardesty (running for Portland City Council position #3) are likely to be annoyed at me for trying to distract them from meeting those immediate needs. (“Black people are being shot by police for being black, and you’re bothering me with *this*?”)

It’s part of the nature of a complex organism that it *has* to do more than one thing at a time, so Jo Ann’s not incorrect. It is probably still useful for me to keep her informed about what I’m doing, even tho’ she disagrees with my prioritization. Keeping open communications is good, but it’s also important for *me* to remember that that’s not the core of *my* job. I’m trying to implement a metaculture.

That’s enough to be one complete thought. I’ve got lots more, but at least I can do you the courtesy of trying to keep it in manageable chunks.
Tags: #1, #19, #3
  • Post a new comment


    default userpic

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.