Mostly written for February 14, 2007
Mostly delivered on February 20, 2007

CAVEAT: This letter contains 1787 words.  It grew during its six days in the oven.  Read it at your leisure.  You could even print it out, although it is not literature.

New York Civic is now five years old.  It was founded in February 2002.  Since then,  we have written 352 columns and 71 Qs, all of which are available on our transparent website, www.nycivic.org. 
 
In the process of writing these articles, we have learned a number of things, related or unrelated to each other, which we would like to share with you in this letter.  We use the first person singular and plural, the second person, and the pronoun "one", but they all refer to your scrivener.   The dozen points in our duodecadialogue (sic) are in no special order, they are thoughts we wanted to discuss with you on our fifth anniversary.  We welcome, nay, solicit, your ideas as to what else we should be doing.
 
1. You cannot remain a reliable friend of any public figure unless he/she receives an absolute pass from criticism.  If you agree with and support 90% of the official's decisions and actions, you will be viewed as betraying him/her when you object to the 10% with which you disagree.  They say they don't mind if you disagree privately (of course, they do), but if you express your views publicly, you are stabbing them to the quick.  The problem is that if you do not say publicly what you believe sincerely, you are not a truthful writer, nor are you really serving your readers.
 
2. You learn about a lot of bad things, which you are reasonably certain are true, on the basis of the credibility of your sources and your insights into human nature.  You have become particularly aware of the arrogance of celebrity, power and wealth having had ample opportunity to observe those who came into fame, office or money, and somehow behaved differently than they did before (not yourself, of course, nor your own master).
 
3. You often cannot write about specific acts of misconduct by public officials because you can't prove they occurred.  Even if you are relatively immune from libel suits under N.Y. Times v. Sullivan, and because you are just too small to bother with, it is not right to write about crimes without sufficient certainty   that you are being accurate.  If you think what I write is negative, imagine what I don't write because of those reservations.  In our society, insiders know much more than the public; if they didn't, they wouldn't be insiders.
 
4. There are certain points of view which in American discourse today are not publicly expressed. I leave them to your imagination and your insight.  I believe that these exclusions from the dialogue are not helpful in resolving social or political  problems, but I could be wrong, and the current muddled situation may be preferable for society than greater freedom which could be abused.  Think of this comparison: If science advanced so that when you were born, they could tell at what age you would die and of what disease, (barring war, crime, suicide, accident or natural disaser), would it be helpful for people to know that?   Rule 23-U: "I don't know and you don't know."
 
5. The largest number of reader responses we ever received was to the article on August 30, 2004 on the passing of our family's beloved golden retriever, "Laramie Boomerang Stern, 1991-2004". Does this mean people are more interested in animals than in politics?  Judging by the e-mail we receive, columns of a personal or retrospective nature are more widely read than articles dealing with the intricacies of political maneuvering.  I  understand that, and there should be a broader mix i next year, because many truths (and some untruths) come from life experience.
 
6. Some of our articles detail highly unsatisfactory conditions, but they do not offer specific suggestions on what people should do about them.  There are a number of reasons for this: A. I try to be a reporter and commentator rather than a pamphleteer.  B. We are a 501(c)3 non-profit and do not endorse political parties or candidates.   C. When you identify yourself with a particular group, you lose credibility with others. You become predictable, like some other columnists.  D. Sometimes people can’t do much about a problem, except through elections or lawsuits.

7. In the field of public affairs, good guys can do bad things, and vice versa.  In politics, alliances and strategies can change with time.  Look at the United States, and other countries we were at war with when I was a child, which became our friends, and then our rivals. Orwell was certainly right on that one.  Particularly in politics, heroes can turn into villains, or the fact may be exposed that they were always scoundrels.  People change for the better or the worse.  
 
8. Your responses and your letters are very important to me. I want to know what my readers are thinking, whether they agree or disagree, and why.  I expect people to disagree a reasonable percentage of the time, I have never been an ideologue who believes himself correct on every issue.  At Parks, while making thousands of decisions over fifteen years, I saw some of them come out wrong. Hopefully, I was closer to a fielding average than a batting average.  But there is no certainty in decision.  Please say whatever you think in your comments.
 
9. In the past, I have failed to answer many of the e-mails that you sent.  I apologize to you, not "to anyone I might have offended".  I believe that when someone does not answer an e-mail from me, they have placed the letter in a balance, and decided that I am not important enough to receive a reply or even an acknowledgement.   But I know that when I do not answer an e-mail, it is because I am overwhelmed by intelligent correspondence which I do not want to brush off, but if answered thoughtfully, I could never do the column.

Without the resources of the state or the for-profit corporation, you cannot hire , staff to handle correspondence just to give people the impression that they are hearing from you and by this ruse demonstrating that you value their views.
 
So, give me another chance.   I promise an acknowledgement within two days for every e-mail.  If I can, I will respond  more substantively.  But every thought will be read. We specifically encourage you to let me know what you think, whether or not you agree with my views or enjoy the writing style.
 
Corrections of fact are particularly welcome.  They will be checked and posted within two days, and you will receive credit for calling the mistake to our attention (unless you opt for anonymity).
 
This is intended to be an interactive blog.  The wonders of technology have made communication much easier (and cheaper).  We should use it to exchange ideas.  To use StarBlog, send an e-mail to StarQuest@nycivic.org, 

10. We have toyed with the idea of using a Tip Jar.  That is a little box that some blogs use so that people who want to contribute can do so directly by e-mail.  Many people would like to give modest sums to help support a blog that they like, but without an easily available way to do it, are unlikely to do so.  It takes time and energy to look up an address, find or buy a 39-cent stamp, and mail a letter, especially if there is no specific incentive to do it on a particular day.  Let us know if you have any feelings about the idea.  Or, if the mood strikes you, send us a Hamilton or a Jackson.  You could even stretch for a Ulysses or a Benjamin or two.  Please don't feel any obligation.
 
11. This has been an exercise in stepping out from behind the curtain to write directly to our 15,000 readers.  Cyberspace is a lonely place, and one always wonders how many of you are in range at any particular time.  We know that there are quite a few, because you greet me when you see me on the bus or subway or in the street.   One advantage of losing a city car, besides better health due to walking, is meeting more people.  I still don't know the great majority of people who wait for the M-86 at York Avenue, but I know they, among others, are the men and women who decide who wins elections, and that is the way it should be.

We look forward to your being in touch.  It is all right for you to be really brief, you let us know that you are there and we can send a response of equal brevity, without you feeling that you are getting short shrift.
 
12.  By the way, Mayor Bloomberg was 65 years old on February 14, and therefore qualifies to ride subways, busses and MTA railroads at half-fare  He will have to do without social security for another ten months however.   The age for full retirement is being incrementally extended because Americans are living  much longer. It will be 67.

We believe that, in general, the Mayor has done a good job, which is one reason we write about him so little.  Most of our attention lately going to Albany and its struggles.  The city has an honest, decent and intelligent mayor, who is taking an increasing role on the national scene on substantive issues.  The next mayor is unlikely to be as good as Mayor Bloomberg.   We all have minor flaws: our mayor does not occasionally relate particularly well to some problems of ordinary people, but he usually corrects himself when he speaks hastily.   We hope when we write about the few situations in which the Czar's ministers have misinformed him, he will take it in a spirit of enlightenment rather than annoyance.

Meanwhile, we wish him a happy birthday, and many more.  He has given us five years of his life, not counting the two or three years he had to spend campaigning for the job.   He also showed that a non-politician could make city government work, which could encourage others to run for office.  We appreciate his work for the people of the City of New York, not to mention his charitable efforts, especially in public health..  If you have any doubt of the value of his services, think of  his rivals, now largely forgotten.   And the Governor makes the Mayor look like a perfect gentleman.

Enjoy Valentine's Day, Presidents' Day and Fat Tuesday.   Say something kind to another person.  Buy something and pay sales tax.  Eat well, but in moderation.
 
StarQuest
 
#352 2.14-19.07   1787wds