From: Bill Reif 
Subject: Re: Why the NFB
Hello Rick, and thank you for your well-worded message.  There are a few
on this list who seem to believe that the NFB has outlived its
usefulness, that the parts (such as the Technology Center and the
talents of individual members) are worth more than the whole, and that
anyone with an opinion has a right to have that opinion heard and acted
on by "them", whoever "them" happens to be.  I find it interesting that
people such as Dan Dunfy, who would rather there were no NFB
"manipulating its members for the ego gratification of its cult-style
leaders" (as he would say); and that the otherwise brainwashed he
certainly believes us to be would either advocate independently or join
the coalition of the moment, nevertheless finds value to continue his
involvement on this list.  The reality, of course, is that we *are* the
organization to which we belong, and that we can play a part in defining
its character even as it plays a part in defining ours.  Our
organization offers not only its resources and its philosophy, but also
a history of strategies that have worked or have not worked.  People
such as Dan, of course, know this and value the expertise of both this
organization and its membership as tools to apply toward that he
believes worth doing, even though he may not see the value of our
approach.  I can assure you that during leadership seminars, the
mistakes we have made in dealing with situations or with people are
discussed and that we, whether making decisions on the chapter, state
affiliate, or national level, take such things into account.  Do we
loudly proclaim our failures to the public?  Of course not.  What good
would that do?  Anyone involved more than perifferally, though, knows
about our past problems in Alaska, the combination of factors that beat
us on the airlines issue, some of the disastrous fund-raising items
we've attempted such as the Talking Elevator box that didn't work, the
court cases in which we weren't successful, etc.  Ironically, most of
those problems could be attributed to a lack of central control and
decision-making, rather than resulting from too much of same.  This
organization allows great opportunity for those willing to "step forth
and do" to make a difference in the lives of the blind, and offers those
people the appropriate resources, the chance to network with others
doing the same, and the history of our successes-failures.  Note that
there has been little criticism from those complaining that the NFB
leadership would not let them do a given thing.  The criticism is
primarily from those who disagree with what others have done or failed
to do.  While that suggests leaders at various levels may occasionally
exercise bad judgement, it doesn't suggest to me that we're too
centrally controlled.  If anyone on this list wants to do anything
regarding Microsoft or computer access generally in addition to, and not
contrary to, the initiatives in which we're already engaged, than have
at it!  Please let's discuss the idea firs, and share the results of
your efforts/contacts.
-- Bill Reif
Springfield, Illinois
                     On 1998-04-12 NFB-Talk@NFBnet.org said:
   >What is one blade of grass without the sun?
   >To what shall it cling without roots?
   >Shall we share the rain and grow together
   >and make use of limited time and resource?
   >Shall we cooperate and make better the world we live in?
   >Or will we yield to the temptations
   >that would impoverish the good efforts
   >by whimpers and whines?
   >I understand things bother you who need to disparage
   >on issues withing the leadership of our organization.
   >But no matter what process you might come up with,
   >no matter how fair you try to make it, you must admit
   >that there will be some one or some group that will
   >find disfavor with it.  We have to live with that
   >frailty of human nature.  But it is also a gift, too, and
   >part of what makes creativity such a fine thing.  Weird, huh.
   >Group harmony is needed in our conventions.  There is so very much
   >to do, and in my observations, I believe that our process and
   >constitution are democratic. But big old town hall debates don't
   >usually yield wise policy making decisions.  But participation on
   >the day to day, hard work in the preliminary drafting of language,
   >and cooperative, civil engagements are the best way, I believe, to
   >address the issues within the Federation.
   >Do you agree?
   >An airing of ideas on a forum such as NFB-Talk
   >could be just where the grass seed is planted.
   >And it is a beautiful spring.  Prepare your soil, and soon
   >we'll break bread together.
   >Happy Easter.
   >Peace.
   >Rik James
   >rikjames@mcn.net
Net-Tamer V 1.11 - Test Drive
---
 # Origin: NFBnet  Internet Email Gateway (1:282/1045)
---------------