KPAO by Dave Cortright

The Social Dilemma is as manipulative as social media itself and ignores personal responsibility

Its intentions are good, but Netflix doc ‘The Social Dilemma’ is as manipulative as Facebook

By inventing entirely fictional plot lines to illustrate key points, the vital film undermines its own authority
https://www.nme.com/en_asia/features/the-social-dilemma-netflix-facebook-2761067

What about personal responsibility to not use the app if you don’t like how it’s manipulating you?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SlKao_Pox5A

Where an individual chooses to focus their attention is a choice. It would help further the discussion if we didn't treat social media consumers as victims but rather as individuals with agency and personal responsibility.

My questions for the Social Dilemma filmmakers:

 

1. Regulation seems to take tech down the same path as tobacco & drugs. What are your thoughts either on focusing primarily on education & treatment—much like Portugal is doing with their drug program—or a hybrid?

2. The need for publicly traded companies to consistently show growth & profit are at the foundation of this arms race. How can we change the system so that companies are not punished for decisions that end up making them grow more slowly or generate fewer profits? B corps?

3. If you look at the underlying reason people want to engage with social media, it is our core need to connect with other people. How can we foster a world where people can mindfully connect with others in healthy and meaningful ways?

 

https://twitter.com/mmasnick/status/1308986939887046656

 

 

On the importance of understanding unintended consequences in any new technology

Really great article on the unintended consequences of technology. From the article:

There are four different types of revenge effects, described here as follows:

1. Repeating effects: occur when more efficient processes end up forcing us to do the same things more often, meaning they don’t free up more of our time. Better household appliances have led to higher standards of cleanliness, meaning people end up spending the same amount of time—or more—on housework.
2. Recomplicating effects: occur when processes become more and more complex as the technology behind them improves. Tenner gives the now-dated example of phone numbers becoming longer with the move away from rotary phones. A modern example might be lighting systems that need to be operated through an app, meaning a visitor cannot simply flip a switch.
3. Regenerating effects: occur when attempts to solve a problem end up creating additional risks. Targeting pests with pesticides can make them increasingly resistant to harm or kill off their natural predators. Widespread use of antibiotics to control certain conditions has led to be resistant strains of bacteria that are harder to treat.
4. Rearranging effects: occur when costs are transferred elsewhere so risks shift and worsen. Air conditioning units on subways cool down the trains—while releasing extra heat and making the platforms warmer. Vacuum cleaners can throw dust mite pellets into the air, where they remain suspended and are more easily breathed in. Shielding beaches from waves transfers the water’s force elsewhere.

The last one I’ve learned as externalizing costs where all you are doing is shifting the cost of something from your own place and time to somewhere else at some other time. This is the basis of burning fossil fuels.

Article: The Unlikely Friendship that Helped Legalize Same-Sex Marriage in Ireland

A fantastic story of empathy and connection between two of the most unlikely of friends. Our government could learn a lesson from this inspiring example.

https://wearenotdivided.reasonstobecheerful.world/the-unlikely-friendship-that-helped-legalize-same-sex-marriage-in-ireland/

Round 2 of my correspondence with Crisis Text Line regarding my involuntary and retaliatory termination

To be completely crystal clear, I encouraged anyone reading my responses to your tweets to reach out to other orgs that offer equivalent services, such as the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline. It’s right there in the tweet you quoted in your original message to me:

• “If you want to talk about suicide, I recommend you go to the experts at the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline @800273TALK and skip @CrisisTextLine who's corporate culture is rooted in racism. #NotMyCrisisTextLine.”

I never suggested that texters reach out to me personally. I once responded to a tweet by DoSomething employee Tej Gokhale stating that any employee from DoSomething who wanted to talk through their workplace trauma could reach out to me. I fail to see how that would be in any way visible to texters. Tej has 106 followers.

 

It appears you are calling me a liar, inferring I was making “false and misleading tweets”. I adamantly rebuke this inference. I respectfully request that—rather than making vague statements like that—you produce specific examples. And if you can not, I would expect a retraction and an apology. I will defend myself of specific claims, but I can not—and will not—tolerate your ad hominem attacks on me and my overall character.

 

You also appear to be making references to things that were not included in your original email to me. Are you now trying to increase the scope of evidence beyond the three Facts of this case? I don’t know what protocol you are following for this case, but it appears to be less than rigorous, almost as if you don’t really have one clearly laid out that you are following.

 

Since I am a resident of California, perhaps you should ask your counsel if you are—in fact—complying with “all applicable laws and regulations.” Because it certainly appears like you may have violated the California Fair Housing and Employment Act in your retaliatory termination of me. I would be happy to have my counsel speak directly to yours in this matter if you would be so kind as to send me their contact information.

 

Also the last sentence of your email says “for the reasons laid out below.” yet lists no reasons below that. Can you please expound on this? I am confused. It almost appears as if you threw this email together quickly without proofreading indicating no real care for its veracity or accuracy.

 

·Dave

 

 

‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐

On Wednesday, September 16, 2020 6:46 PM, Crisis Counselor Policy Review Committee <ccprc@crisistextline.org> wrote:

 

Thank you for your message, Dave.

The reason(s) for your dismissal were clearly spelled out in our committee’s email, and were directly tied to objective criteria and conduct specified therein which violated our Code of Conduct. 

While we will not engage in a back and forth regarding characterizations in your email -- which we dispute vigorously, to be clear -- we would like to respond to your question about who is harmed by the Code of Conduct violations cited below. 

1. Texters. Texters and would-be texters are harmed when a CTL volunteer publicly discourages texters from texting in during their moment of need. As you know, we serve all members of the public, and 68% of our texters reach out to us with something they have never told another person, some of whom text in regarding suicidal ideation. Telling texters to not reach out to us -- and instead to reach out to you personally -- is not something the org can excuse from one of its volunteers.
2. The org and its personnel. In addition to the dangerous harm to texters discussed above, a CTL volunteer making false and misleading tweets concerning the org’s culture and its transformation harms the people at CTL that have been working so hard to accomplish the changes that the org needs over the last several months by (a) minimizing and disparaging their work, and (b) discouraging donors and funders from helping to keep those people employed and to keep the lights on. That kind of harm -- in addition to the harm to the org’s texters discussed above -- is not something the org can excuse from one of its volunteers. 

The organization complies with all applicable laws and regulations, and takes pride in its support and compassion for all of its community members. We deeply value our CCs, and we are saddened when one has to be dismissed. But this was one of those times, for the reasons laid out below. 

Take care.

Crisis Counselor Policy Review Committee

 

Learn | Volunteer | Press | Careers

 

California mail-in election ballot tracking website 2020

Putting this here so I won’t forget it. Maybe of use to others too…

https://california.ballottrax.net/voter

My response to Crisis Text Line RE: my involuntary termination

On Tuesday, September 15, 2020 7:38 PM, Dave Cortright wrote to Crisis Counselor Policy Review Committee <ccprc@crisistextline.org>:

 

I respectfully disagree with both your framing of the issues here and your conclusion. I very much want to be a part of the Crisis Text Line community, but not the one it has historically been—rooted in systemic racism and a toxic workplace. I want to be a part of a newer, better Crisis Text Line that—at its foundation, and throughout all levels of the organizational—embodies the ideals your training teaches us to use with the texters. 

 

You must surely be aware that many volunteers and employees have been disappointed with your anemic response to the organizational crisis you are undergoing. There is a whole grassroots movement that has been watching with increasing dismay and disappointment with each feint at something of substance only to have it changed or canceled or “rescheduled” and ultimately concluding in nothing.

 

I respectfully ask: who in particular was harassed or harmed by my tweets? Because as you might notice upon further review of the tweets you quoted below, I called out no single individual in them. I was merely offering facts (and my particular view of those facts) about the organization as a whole—not any one person in particular—in order to help shine a light on what I see is a lack of accountability and action within the organization. 

 

The sad thing here is I could be such an asset and ally for the cause. I challenge you to go back and look at my conversations I’ve had with texters. I've received above average texter feels (somewhere in the 14% range IIRC) and I am quite likely also above average when it comes to whatever metrics you use to measure counselor effectiveness.

 

While you are at it, go check out all of my posts on Mighty Networks, as well as in the group chat on the platform. I was stepping up voluntarily—and quite effectively from the responses I received—as a mentor, providing tips and insights to help make the whole network around me better. I posted about the peak-end rule and use that to craft such a powerful close that I got consistent, positive feedback from texters and counselors alike:

 

“Thank you so much for reaching out today and sharing your story with me. I am honored you trusted me to open up about your struggles. It shows your strength to confront these things head on in order to overcome them. It’s inspiring! Remember, if you’re ever in crisis again, we will always be here for you. You never have to go through these things alone. Never. Take care.”

 

 That you would just make a unilateral decision like this to terminate my affiliation with your organization without even attempting to have a conversation with me first speaks volumes for the kind of organization you are. I have never seen such extreme irony in my life. You—an organization that ostensibly meets people “where they are”—refusing to even meet one of its own where they are.

 

You claim I did not use internal mechanisms for providing feedback; yet I did. If you again check Mighty Networks AND the Google form AND messages sent to my coach AND supervisors, I provided plenty of feedback. I reported privacy issues only to have them ignored. So what is my recourse when you aren't responding?

 

Let me conclude by saying how grateful I am that you gave me this opportunity to become a trained crisis counselor and to both learn and grow in that role while helping to play a small yet meaningful part in dealing with the growing mental health crisis in our country. Despite this involuntary—and in my mind unjust—termination, I am still proud that I fulfilled  my 200 hour commitment and that I can take this training and experience onward and upward to even greater heights.

 

Best regards,

·Dave

 

Original message here

Crisis Text Line involuntarily terminated me for speaking the truth about their racism and lack of meaningful change

I just received the email below from the Crisis Text Line policy review committee. I stand by my opinions in those tweets that are based on the facts that I’ve gathered from the public messaging and that sent to the crisis counselor volunteers. I’m not surprised by their actions here, just disappointed. It shows that the organization is still feeling and acting defensive rather than coming from a place of true contrition and a desire to change for the better.

I’m grateful for what I learned from them and the experiences I had volunteering with them. I’m also grateful they showed me their true colors so that I don’t waste any more time giving to and organization that is fundamentally at odds with my values.

On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 11:18, Crisis Counselor Policy Review Committee <ccprc@crisistextline.org> wrote:

Hi, Dave. I am reaching out today with an important message from the Crisis Counselor Policy Review Committee of Crisis Text Line. Our committee consists of senior leaders in the organization. We are tasked with reviewing severe violations of our Code of Conduct and related policies. We're contacting you regarding some of your public activity which came to our attention.

I. Background
The safety and integrity of our community are extremely important to us. In relevant part, to further those goals, our Code of Conduct states that:  “We are a diverse Community made up of individuals of different backgrounds. Anything, including harassment of any kind, that harms one of us, hurts all of us....” and “We will treat all members of the Community with respect.”In short, Crisis Counselors are responsible for maintaining a respectful and inclusive atmosphere in our community.

 

II. Facts
On September 8, 2020 at 7:48 PM, you tweeted: 

• “If you want to talk about suicide, I recommend you go to the experts at the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline  @800273TALK and skip @CrisisTextLine who's corporate culture is rooted in racism. #NotMyCrisisTextLine.”

• On September 8, 2020 at 12:56 PM, you tweeted: “Anyone who wants to talk through their trauma, DM me. I am a trained crisis counselor and I'd be more than happy using my skills to help assuage the damage inflicted upon anyone from the toxicity at... @CrisisTextLine. #DSWalkout #NotMyCrisisTextLine.”

• On September 4, 2020 at 8:18 AM, you tweeted: “OMG, they hypocrisy… Get your own house in order first if you want to have any credibility whatsoever. What substantial change have you made other than scapegoating your founder and ex-CEO? So many opportunities to do the right thing here wasted. #NotMyCrisisTextLine.”

 

III. Findings
Following a thorough investigation, we have determined you have violated our Code of Conduct as follows:

• Engaging in Disrespectful Behavior with Community Members. Engaging in disrespectful conduct toward members of our community is a violation of our Code of Conduct. Maintaining a safe, inclusive, and respectful atmosphere in our community is critical for our volunteers, and for the integrity of our service as a whole. While we understand that volunteers may have differing views regarding the org or its decision making processes, we offer numerous outlets for volunteers to air those grievances constructively within the organization -- such as through the Talk to Us function on our platform, emailing your Coach, emailing info@, or emailing ccprc@ for alleged misconduct. Here though, where a volunteer instead simply publicly denigrates the organization on social media and indicates that they no longer want to be a part of it, we have a responsibility to act.

 

IV. Conclusion
The policies discussed above are grounded in protecting the safety and integrity of our CC community and the organization. We take those policies seriously, and have determined that in light of these violations, we must dismiss you from our Crisis Counselor community.

 

We hope that you are able to find another volunteer opportunity that suits your interests, and we thank you for your contributions to Crisis Text Line. We wish you the best.

 

Sincerely,  

Crisis Counselor Policy Review Committee

 

 

 

Learn | Volunteer | Press | Careers

 

 

My tactics when voting for down-ballot offices

Here are the tactics I use when voting for down-ballot offices that I’m not as familiar with:

1. bring up each candidate’s web site and search for issues I care most about—e.g. SEL, mental health, the environment, civil rights (Google’s site: search is a great tool for this)
2. when in doubt, vote the incumbent out
3. when choosing between multiple candidates, lean towards Greens, Independents, and Democrats—in that order
4. when choosing between multiple candidates, lean toward BIPOC, women, and non-politicians—in that order

Out-of-control wildfires in SF Bay Area (Big Basin) were inevitable because State Parks weren’t doing proper forest management

We know that fire is an integral part of forest ecosystems. We know that our previous policy of “complete fire suppression” is a recipe for disaster. And yet parks still screwed up and was at least indirectly responsible for the blaze that eliminated most of the structures in the park. And one of the park’s environmental scientists saw it coming:

Nine months before Big Basin Redwood State Park suffered its worst fire in recorded history, one of the park’s environmental scientists gave a podcast interview revealing that a prescribed burn had not taken place within the park in three years… “Given the right conditions, we’re poised to have catastrophic wildfires all over California,” says [Portia] Halbert, who works for the Santa Cruz District of the California State Park System. 

And it looks like bureaucracy was to blame. The government doesn’t have the fortitude to publicly stand up and say that being overly cautious regarding moisture, wind, and air quality has its own risks, the consequences we are seeing right now.

The fact that prescribed burns have not taken place in Big Basin for years is a surprise even to people who work for the park and partner organizations.

“We haven’t done a large burn in Big Basin in the last three years because the weather hasn’t lined up,” Halbert says in the podcast. She brings up other bottlenecks to prescribed burns including permitting issues, staffing, and a short — or nonexistent — window for favorable weather conditions.

Big Basin burns can only happen in the fall. The fuel, composed of vegetation and plant material that burns easily, can’t be too wet or too dry. There must be some rain, but not too much. Winds must be blowing away from populated areas. If the winter rains come, the opportunity is gone.

Strict guidelines established by the Clean Air Act and enforced by air-quality districts can also prevent burns. “It’s a great thing to protect public health, but it makes it challenging for us to actually implement prescribed fires,” Halbert says.

For these reasons and more, prescribed burns have been underutilized not only in Big Basin but throughout California, according to a recent Stanford study published in Nature.

Just received a social security scam call from 918-820-3352

I was expecting a call from someone in this region so when I picked up I thought it might be from them. It turned out to be scammers claiming there was a problem with my social security number. When he asked me to verify my SSN, I said I don’t feel comfortable giving that information out over the phone. He insisted I needed to in order for him to help me fix the problem. I said, this feels like a scam to me. I’m not giving you my SSN. Please fix the problem without it. And he said “fuck you” and hung up.