I do find myself wondering — with all three technologies in this
session — what’s the point? I’m not persuaded that these technologies
add value to the more fundamental matter of people actually speaking
to each other. Maybe my luddism is showing — I’m obviously not hip to
‘activist gaming’ — but I’m not sure these folks are clear on what the
specific problem is – the ‘what’s missing’ — that their proposed tools
are solving. Seems to me to be inescapable essential that people
actually speak to each other — that change in the world will come from
changes in what we do, which in turn will come from what we say, to
each other and to ourselves.

I can see that this is a new and potentially useful new media channel, a way to get new ideas to new people. Jon Ramer of Interra,
sitting behind me, offered the perspectice of activist games as a very
effective learning system — the game as a way for epople to learning
about how to organize the the ‘real’ world, to share best practices, to
‘interoperate’ together. (Does that mean, like, ‘actually speak to each
other? 🙂