If there is a positive advocate for the online world, it’s you. Wherever Dan is going we’ll let you guys know what his next project is. Right now – you can find him at http://www.tripdata.com/ – where you can Dream/Travel/Grow. But he’s got something more up his sleeve and we’re looking forward to it.

We write this blog for people like you – and all the other folks who have questions and reservations about the new online tools. You should be skeptical about the privacy implications, the societal implications and the mind-altering implications. We know of no more chilling recent article than “Is Google Making Us Stoopid?- What the Internet is doing to our brains.”

On the other hand, I recently interviewed Dave Taylor for an upcoming blog article. He’s a Boulder “tech celeb” who you may well know. You asked in your comment, “Plus, I’ve used if for random personal comments, not anything professional or even articulate. Should strangers know I like Elephant Malt Liquor on Thanks giving? (Haven’t had it in a year) or that my baby daughter is sick?“

Dave Taylor tells his Twitter followers this kind of thing – and he does so touchingly, while walking his own clearly defined line between openness and privacy. He also actually “gets people together” in the real world – something rare on Twitter. Don’t give up or dismiss all this until you read how Dave puts this tool to use.

The world was better off because of your blog – and it will be better off the more engaged you become again.

None of this is about the technologies. Those are far too touted, with far too few people willing to say, “Wait a minute, let’s stop and think about this stuff.” If it has value at all – it’s not because of the technologies. It’s because of people like you.

Wrote this recently about Gina – “For one thing, she’s way more optimistic about new technologies than I am.” So, Dan, if you want some positive encouragement that these online tools are a good thing, don’t hang around folks like us. Get to know Gina Schreck. Don’t know about her philosopher’s comment, that “One bad apple don’t spoil the whole bunch girl (or boy).”

I’d advise you stick with the great pundit, Will Rogers – “Politics is applesauce.”

Especially for the link you provided in your comment. The author of the thought-provoking blog post in Mike’s comment above is Jeff Jarvis, who among millions of other things is one of the creators of “The Yuckiest Site on the Internet.” It’s worth going to that site – but it’s even more worth reading Jeff Jarvis’ “United States of Google.”

As you can see I’m just getting into Twitter and I appreciate seeing how you’re using it for productive ends. My first thought about Twitter was cynical; who would care what random thoughts I have? But I am fascinated by the synergy possible you’ve shown me.

Plus, I’ve used if for random personal comments, not anything professional or even articulate. Should strangers know I like Elephant Malt Liquor on Thanks giving? (Haven’t had it in a year) or that my baby daughter is sick? And especially as this gives away details of my life, and by my own choosing, what kind of online resume am I unintentionally building?

That’s what’s wild about web 2.0 capabilities. Anyone over 25 (if not 15) is taking their habitual, subconscious manners of communication and pasting that behavior into new vehicles that are more easily traced, compiled and catalogued than I think we realize. We never established mental filters on our commenting via some online tool. For example, right now, I’m just journaling really. I’m not seeing any body language, hearing sighs or grunts, being interrupted or getting any feedback. I can rant and stream-of-consciousness myself til I feel I’ve said what’s on my mind.

Bottom line – is that a good thing?

My experience with the blog is that a few bad apples as Gina referenced are both guaranteed and exponentially more damaging. Their ability to rant unchallenged can quickly tar a conversation, blog, website, whatever, and with millions of choices on where to participate online, reasonable people move on.

Such people can stifle the growth of an online intellectual movement very quickly. Critical mass is necessary for any Patriot and Web 2.0 participant to produce change. The double edge sword of easy and global 2.0 technology is how anonymous, savvy, malicious and just plain weird people can sabatoge an effort.

To go on a further tangent, you know those ridiculous audience meters and “points scored” graphincs on CNN during the presidential debates? I envision them gone for the 2012 election. You’ll have the option to see cetain people’s reactions sonewhere online, but the real news stations (there’s a discussion topic) will have Truth Checks happening in real time with the candidates comments. Running fact checks will call them on all their points, showing who’s shading the truth, telling the truth, plain wrong, etc. Ahh, this is my dream.

So, I’m proving my own first point as I rant on here (the family is all sleeping due to illness, hence my chatting online on Thanksgiving). Thanks for involving me in your blog, I’m glad to be back in touch.

Hopefully Dan will remember the wisdom shared by the philosophers the Jackson 5 when they said, “One bad apple don’t spoil the whole bunch girl (or boy).”

In the mean time I look forward to meeting and tweeting with him on the important (and not so important) issues in Boulder!

Or something…

Anyway, speaking of Government 2.0 and the like, Jeff Jarvis does some great writing on that and related subjects. For example, check out his “United States of Google” post.