random
07-24-2007, 01:57 PM
Several people put a lot of effort into their Youtube questions, but since only a fraction of them get asked, many are left disappointed. Here is a plan to use our collective effort to get "official" answers from Dr. Paul to every serious question asked on both the Republican and the Democratic debates, and maybe even the unanswered Youtube/Google questions. I'd like to use this thread to plan, polish, and (hopefully!) get this project underway.
Basic idea:
The basic idea is simple: Of the many questions asked, Dr. Paul has already answered identical/similar questions many times on clips that are posted on Youtube and elsewhere. Usually, the questioner hasn't really looked. The plan is to find matches for most of these questions (editing clips if necessary), leaving just a small fraction of "new" questions for Dr. Paul to directly answer. We can use the forum to pool our resources and come to a consensus on issues such as "which answer best matches this question?".
With most of the hard work and tricky issues done (in parallel) by us, the campaign staff will simply have to "officially" sign off on the videos and deal with a handful of outstanding questions.
Why bother?:
Since most of the answers are going to be in the form of pre-existing clips, why bother with this at all? After all, Youtube already has a mechanism for permitting us to respond to questions and point out the relevant clips, so why have an "official" response? I can think of three reasons:
The personal touch: Even if Dr. Paul hasn't personally responded (or even seen) the question, its as personal as a campaign response to a letter. Plus, if each response clip ends with a link to the full interview, the questioner gets a chance to see Dr. Paul tackle related questions (and start doing some of their own reasearch!!)
Media attention: Even with many volunteers, it isn't going to be easy to answer all the thousands of questions. So if we can actually accomplish this in a short enough period of time, it sends out a message that Dr. Paul's support doesn't just consist of internet weirdos and couch potatoes, i.e. his message is powerful! The scale of the project and of course its novelty should grab the media's attention.
Challenging questions: Finally, if the campaign can send out a notification adding that particularly challenging or well-posed questions will receive dedicated answers, we could end up with an excellent list of "top 20 questions to ask your candidate" that could be useful elsewhere, e.g. for advertisement, campaign videos, and further discussion by/with the media.
Feasibility:
Here, I admit, I'm not certain. I know that for every "questions for Ron Paul" clip I've seen, I can think of a clip where I've seen him answering it. So the challenge, I think, will be to co-ordinate our efforts to avoid duplicating work. There's going to be a lot to do: compiling a list (growing) of suitable clips, editing the relevant segments, categorizing questions and answers, scouring for daily updates, etc.
Should we do it?:
OK, so having outlined the plan, the main question is: should we do it? I think it can be done, and I think it will be effective. So what do you think? What are some of the risks in doing it? Suggestions for improving the plan? Fire away!
Basic idea:
The basic idea is simple: Of the many questions asked, Dr. Paul has already answered identical/similar questions many times on clips that are posted on Youtube and elsewhere. Usually, the questioner hasn't really looked. The plan is to find matches for most of these questions (editing clips if necessary), leaving just a small fraction of "new" questions for Dr. Paul to directly answer. We can use the forum to pool our resources and come to a consensus on issues such as "which answer best matches this question?".
With most of the hard work and tricky issues done (in parallel) by us, the campaign staff will simply have to "officially" sign off on the videos and deal with a handful of outstanding questions.
Why bother?:
Since most of the answers are going to be in the form of pre-existing clips, why bother with this at all? After all, Youtube already has a mechanism for permitting us to respond to questions and point out the relevant clips, so why have an "official" response? I can think of three reasons:
The personal touch: Even if Dr. Paul hasn't personally responded (or even seen) the question, its as personal as a campaign response to a letter. Plus, if each response clip ends with a link to the full interview, the questioner gets a chance to see Dr. Paul tackle related questions (and start doing some of their own reasearch!!)
Media attention: Even with many volunteers, it isn't going to be easy to answer all the thousands of questions. So if we can actually accomplish this in a short enough period of time, it sends out a message that Dr. Paul's support doesn't just consist of internet weirdos and couch potatoes, i.e. his message is powerful! The scale of the project and of course its novelty should grab the media's attention.
Challenging questions: Finally, if the campaign can send out a notification adding that particularly challenging or well-posed questions will receive dedicated answers, we could end up with an excellent list of "top 20 questions to ask your candidate" that could be useful elsewhere, e.g. for advertisement, campaign videos, and further discussion by/with the media.
Feasibility:
Here, I admit, I'm not certain. I know that for every "questions for Ron Paul" clip I've seen, I can think of a clip where I've seen him answering it. So the challenge, I think, will be to co-ordinate our efforts to avoid duplicating work. There's going to be a lot to do: compiling a list (growing) of suitable clips, editing the relevant segments, categorizing questions and answers, scouring for daily updates, etc.
Should we do it?:
OK, so having outlined the plan, the main question is: should we do it? I think it can be done, and I think it will be effective. So what do you think? What are some of the risks in doing it? Suggestions for improving the plan? Fire away!