–Margie Doyle —
No wonder, as a friend said recently, we’re all feeling a bit waspish lately. Some of the issues affecting Orcas Island, San Juan County, the Pacific NW, the United States nation, and the world are the Eastsound Streetscapes, Port Master Plans, County Comprehensive Plan updates, upholding immigrant/refugee rights, fiber optic installations and power sustainability, starvation/malnutrition of the Orca (specifically J pod), development of/urbanization of rural/natural areas, state ferry services, public/taxpayer financing of libraries, schools, fire and airport districts, medical care availability, government elections, and the decline/death of the middle class.
We’re proud that in its 10 years of existence, Orcas Issues, News and Views has become a pertinent and civil forum for our readers to comment on reports, articles, columns and opinions that we publish as “the Voice of the Community.” We’re also proud of our accuracy and responsiveness, though since we’re human, we fall short sometimes. We appreciate our readers pointing out those mistakes and helping us correct them. And we’re proud of the diversity of viewpoints represented for conversation on Orcas Issues — no robots or trolls, just individuals on the “unique character” spectrum.
Most importantly, we still believe that local news plays an absolutely essential role in the life of communities like ours. We’re proud that the Orcas Issues “Daily Digest” has an average open rate among our subscribers of 64.7 percent (where the industry average for Media and Publishing is 17.4 percent); and that our click-through rate to read articles is 40.7 percent (with the industry average being 3.6 percent).
From its beginning 10 years ago (as “BullWings: Orcas Issues, News and Views”), we at Orcas Issues, an independent, local news service, have relied on and believed in the support of community readers. Thanks to all of you who sustain us with paid subscriptions, some of you since 2008.
We’d like at this time to acknowledge those supporters who contribute at a level of more than $240 a year (some at $20/month through PayPal or checking accounts). Some of these folks have wished to remain anonymous, but thank you to all contributors, especially to those who value independent journalism that help us to be informed and well-rounded.
- Joan Crosby
- Joe Cohen and Martha Farish
- Vince and Patty Monaco
- Stephanie Solien and Franklin Greer
- Eleanor Hoague and Marc Cohen
- Michael Greenberg
- Tony and Nancy Ayer
- Janet Alderton
- Carson Scheidel
- Valerie and Charles Binford
- Christopher and Nancy Allan
- Anji Ringzen and Michael Austen
- Laurel Rust
5 anonymous
Announcements:
We’re celebrating 10 years of publishing local public news this November, and will be inviting all our paid subscribers to a celebration on November 11, Sunday evening. Details will follow to them.
And a new development that we’ve been struggling to address in recent months: comment limits. We’ll limit comments to 350 words (the word count of the first 5 paragraphs of this editorial) to keep them succinct and hope that people work with us to state their opinions clearly and concisely. If you want to comment more fulsomely, send us a letter to the editor or a guest opinion referencing the posted article, or giving your unique opinion, and we’ll consider posting it. We’re spending a lot of time monitoring comments and trying to decide when conversation becomes prosecutorial, repetitious, or unduly personal. Yikes, we editors work hard for the livelihood that Orcas Issues provides and to find the moments in between reporting, monitoring, and researching that we can editorialize.
But this is the moment. Please subscribe if you don’t already, save the date for Nov. 11 and please consider how to best maintain the journalistic standards that Orcas Issues strives to uphold. Thank you for your support.
Margie, you are a wise and thoughtful editor.
I think this new policy will be effective in allowing us to share thoughts but not dominate the conversation. I, for one, am sure that I have shut down other Commentators by writing too often, or too long. So this will make you think much more about my comments before I write.
I second Eleanor’s praise and would only add a factor of “10” to my own overwhelming length of comments. I’ve never lived anywhere but in the Rome of our times where moderation or limits never applied. But then I’ve never really lived in America, either. Obviously I need to adjust. I’ll add some sugar to Margie’s civilized advice and make lemonade, that is, I’ll economize to improve delivery & clarity. Thank you, Margie. (Now where’s that wordcount App?)
Accuracy, accessibility, transparency, impartiality, fairness, courage and questioning with participant responsibility for notice, debate and depth. Thank you Margie for laboring to bring this to us!
Yes Chris has been a bit verbose, but has also exposed us to the workings of a fine, rational and thoughtful mind reinforced by the ability to see the “big picture” with grace and civility. His critical thought process is a gift that the community should treasure and is vastly preferable to the litany of emotion charged causes du jour that so exhaust our editors. So thank you too Chris, and please continue to contribute your thoughts, with the requisite brevity of course!
I don’t find the lengthy responses burdensome and in the spirit of the First Amendment, why bother to censor people? The self-policing of the group has been remarkably civil (and way nicer than any other blog/post I have encountered.) The beauty of e-media is that there isn’t really a higher cost/price for more words. This is one place where I have leaned from people with whom I may disagree and it is safe to post here because people on Orcas are generally kind, thoughtful and civil.
I support and have supported OrcasIssues since their startup. This is a privately run operation and on a shoestring budget that provides an incalculable service to the Orcas community. If you think that limiting the comment length to 350 words is censorship, please reconsider.
I like to hear what others have to say pertaining to a letter, article or editorial published but if one cannot say it in 350 words then maybe it is time to start being succinct.
The few times when I ran for public office we were told by either the election’s office or the print or online papers to keep our statements to a certain length; I don’t know of anyone who thought that they were being censored.
And, that there is no cost for all the words; sure there is no typesetting costs but Orcas Issues’ Margie, Lyn and others have to read everything in order to providing quality news source. It’s their “paper”. I may be wrong but this is not your usual “blog/post” or “self policing of the group has been remarkably civil”. I read the Orcas Issues because I want to be connected to a locally grown news source that covers what is of interest to the whole community. I know of and appreciate the dedication and professionalism of the Margie, Lyn and the rest of the staff.
By the way this is 233 words.
Tony, thanks for taking me to the woodshed. I hope it was enjoyable for you. Your comment is the exact type of self-policing I was talking about, although your threshold for a divergent opinion is pretty low. Have a great evening anyway and when I get back there I’ll take you out for a drink. Brevity May be the Soul of Wit (Thanks Bill S.) but sometimes I yearn for something with a bit more meat on the bones.
Fair enough. Other local online news outlets limit Letters to the Ed at 350 words. Thanks for your time!
To address Neil’s comments requires a bit more substance.
The truth is I’m uncomfortable speaking my mind in this forum (believe it or not I’ve kept it fairly superficial). I’ll likely revert back to the reason why I bought here: beauty, tranquility, a slower pace and a simpler way of being; and, like others, I’ll probably go private when not away traveling or working which is quite often. I hope that’s not too real?
In all candor, to provide an open forum to the largest number of people in the community is not to seek the highest quality of thought. The OI cannot be the stuff of “white papers.” It can’t go deep into subjects. I’ve tried to test the waters. So, if I participate, I’ll stick to everyday subjects and try to insist on rational thinking where possible–but without explaining why b/c it implicates too many beliefs held by too many people. It’s not enough but then I have other forums and other islands in this world for deeper diving. Also, a podcast would be better suited for doing on-line deeper thinking where speakers & guests are limited to those with higher quality information and understanding to discuss and impart. In fact, podcasts already exist for this purpose.
The OI wants to maintain standards of what’s published. It should. Two women must spend an inordinate amount of time screening, monitoring, and reviewing everything that’s published. It has to be a labor of love otherwise how could they do it? Amazing! My spouse and I have been contributing $20/mo. to the OI- a small sum– so it’s even more amazing that it does what it does. Perhaps we’ll continue and/or increase the contribution. For now: Brava, Lyn and Margie!
The OI is part idea stimulator, part local news outlet and part practical information outlet; it wears a few journalistic hats and it serves a very practical purpose for the community. Wonderful!
Thus– some practical reasons why a 350-word limit works here.
(332)
Just a teaspoon-full of deeper observation as a parting gesture:
Orcas Island is in many ways a reflection of our nation—1/3 generation Z (their mentality) and their “older” facilitators as found on many of the country’s elite universities today; they represent “the coddled-mind” supported by un-insightful and deeply unintelligent facilitators incapable of comprehending the meaning of free speech; instead, they’ve been raised to be obsessed with turning every faux pas into a micro-aggression taking no prisoners in their tyranny of the deeply irrational (mob), 1/3 old-fashioned folks like my parents who survive(d) by common sense, do no obvious harm but do not lend much support to moving our species forward and away from the violence that is deeply rooted in the irrational mind (these can be republicans or democrats), and 1/3 millennials and their antecedents (pre 1995, roughly) who are more deeply educated and capable of deeper comprehension (when not struggling to survive) in the areas of peace and freedom (of expression)—within this group you’ll find your “classical” liberals who are not to be confused with most of today’s progressive liberals. Classical liberals are not illiberal; they’re not threatened by differing and diverse opinion. Sadly, they and Reason, itself, are being silenced by the growing above-mentioned mobs (of “offended” irrationals). Trump’s autocratic mind isn’t the only threat we face.
Apart from these larger groupings are the more cynical smatterings of independents and libertarians, many of whom see less hope of overcoming our manufacturing defects (or that we won’t evolve fast enough to save our own skin); they mostly prefer to stand apart (and observe)–many of our Silicon Valley billionaires fall into this category; they prefer to make plans for what they see as the inevitable. They may be deeply rational but deeply suspect at the same time. Or, they may be typically irrational but for idiosyncratic reasons prefer to be left alone to wallow in their own primordial soup.
It’s a rough sketch but a fairly accurate one, nonetheless…certainly capable of refinement but for our hard limitations.
(Perhaps that was a tablespoon, forgive me)
(348)
For those classical liberals temporarily donning progressive outer wear (and who know better), be cognizant of your own “moral panic” due to the times we live in– in better understanding your sudden conversion from your better, deeper selves.
Chris, we will be poorer for the loss of your introspection and the much needed balance you bring to a decidedly “progressive” community. I too fear that American freedom is imperiled by mob hysteria masquerading as “democracy”. Modern Jacobin “progressives” appear blissfully unaware of Robespierre’s fate, or cynically indifferent to Trotsky’s. Let them beware, “Those who forget their past are condemned to repeat it” (Santayana).
I could continue, but what’s the use. We suffer Cassandra’s curse.
Chris, I am delighted that you used a total of 680 words even before the last posting. I don’t think any of them should have been cut or edited and you needed all of them to get your points across. Bravo! I should be out there in early November and will look you up.
good heavens. really, Phil Peterson, Neil Kaye, or anyone else who fears “progressive” dictatorship of the media? Considering that there are 4 progressive/”liberal” radio stations in the entire U.S. (see this map), I would love to meet with any of you for tea so we can see each others’ faces and not hide behind our computers, and focus on our similarities – not false polarities that are generated these kind of sweeping generalizations. I’m in the phone book; give me a call and let’s meet for tea! PS – the Sounder only allows 350 words for a letter to the editor; not sure of their policy on comment length.
@ Chris Graham, although I don’t always understand what you are saying, being more of a “get to the point” kind of person, I appreciate your viewpoint and tireless advocacy for people and Place. My invitation to meet for tea extends to you.
It seems many of us meet in the “comments” here on Orcas Issues – a meeting place for community journalism. I would like to see us meet more in “real time,” know each others’ faces. This community is built on the foundation that we can work together. it’s all to easy, behind a computer screen, to be divisive and make assumptions about people you don’t know; we’re all guilty of that to some point. Let’s fix it.