Al Gore's Webmaster Answers Your Questions

Ben Green says, "First of all, I want to thank Robin Miller, Hemos, and CmdrTaco for giving me the opportunity to participate in this discussion. Slashdot has been a great resource for me both professionally and recreationally, since I started at Gore 2000."

1) Internet Policy
by Uruk (#6)

Something that I've seen missing from all of the candidate's Web sites is their policy on the Internet. How can you campaign on the Internet and not discuss the issues pertaining to the very media you're putting your ideas out on?

Ben:

This is a great question and one I obviously cannot speak for other candidates on. As for Al Gore's policies on Internet and Tech issues, there is quite a bit of content on our site regarding those issues.

Making all our content easy to find is a challenge for sure. We recently added a search feature that returns 139 pages when queried for the word "Internet", and 164 pages when queried for the words "Internet Policy". Without going in to painstaking detail, some of the topics covered in relation to Internet policy at algore2000.com, are a comprehensive Tech policy paper, and answers to four questions posted by visitors to the Town Hall portion of the Web site.

Incidentally, video of Gore's speech from Baltimore on Monday, which addressed the issue of the "Digital Divide" is posted on the site, as well as a text version.

You can search the Gore 2000 Web site from the main index page, as well as all 50 state pages, Town Hall, The Agenda, and The Briefing Room.

2) Why Linux?
by VP (#8)

According to netcraft, algore2000 is running Linux and Apache. What were the reasons for choosing that platform, and were they mainly technical, or political? Was this your initial choice, or did you change the platform at some point?

Ben:

Originally, algore2000.com ran on an NT box using the IIS Web server. The move to Linux came about for a number of reasons, and coincided with the campaign's move from K Street in Washington, DC to a new location on Charlotte Avenue in Nashville.

Our primary reasons for moving to Linux:

i) Performance ii) Reliability iii) Security iv) Cost-effectiveness

The move to Nashville and the subsequent reinvigoration of the campaign is in many ways analogous to our site's move to the Linux platform and what it has allowed us to do on the Internet.

Throughout most of last year, the campaign was overspending on many things and Web hosting was one of them. When Al Gore announced that he was moving us all to Nashville, we took a look at all our expenses to see where we could cut costs. When we determined that changing hosts would save us money, it allowed me an opportunity to fully explore the possibility of moving the site to a Linux environment.

Our long-term plans called for a lot of dynamic page generation and up until that point we had been using asps for our interactive forms. We also assumed that our site would start getting a lot more traffic as we moved into the primary season, so server performance was definitely an issue as well. Expanding the functionality of the site with asps and would have been expensive.

It became clear to me at that point that Linux was our best option, and given the chance to switch over it was an easy decision to make.

Since we moved to Nashville, this campaign has really turned around and our web site has improved a great deal. By using a tool called asp2php, we were able to convert our existing asps to a format compatible with Linux, and add a ton of functionality such a publishing system, state by state pages, and other stuff that you can see by visiting our site. Michael Kohn, (naken@i1.net) the author of asp2php, deserves much of the credit for making this happen. Our site wouldn't be what it is now without his help. There are other people who deserve credit for this as well Jeff Barger (maczilla-at-look-dot-net), who helps me administer our listservs, provided great advice and ideas.

The real heavy lifting was done by Eric Loeb, (frontaloeb@yahoo.com) who is one of the real pioneers of the field of politics and the Internet having worked on Clinton-Gore '92's e-mail distribution system, and the first - ever campaign Web site for Ted Kennedy's 1994 re-election. Eric is the chief software engineer at Gore 2000. During the month of January, he worked around the clock for three weeks to build algore2000.com's customized publishing system with php and mysql.

3) Marketing
by TheTomcat (#10)

What marketing and advertising methods have you found most successful for promoting the Web site? We all know that banners are dying, and the creators have to become more creative to get people to even NOTICE the banners. Is old media (television, print -- newspapers, magazines, billboards etc., radio.) the backend to the Web site's marketing campaign, or have you found innovative ways to make online promotion work?

Ben:

Probably the coolest promotion we have done so far has been our use of RealFlash. Back when Al Gore announced his candidacy last June, we bought 500,000 "pre-roll" impressions on the Real Broadcast Network to promote the live Web cast of the announcement speech. The click-through rate was very good, far better than we expected. If you aren't familiar with RealFlash, it is basically a flash presentation that is viewed in a RealPlayer, and is served to folks who are using the "presets" in the RealPlayer. Eileen Quigley and Sam Tucker at RealImpact helped us put that together, and it was the first-ever paid Internet advertising by a presidential campaign.

Other than paid promotion, we have seen traffic on our site affected by news events. Obviously the Iowa Caucus and the New Hampshire Primary generated a lot of traffic to our site, which has tripled since the first of the year. We are now averaging slightly less than 20,000 user sessions per day.

Whenever Al Gore is out on the campaign trail he mentions the Web site, the news media picks it up, and the site gets hit. One day last fall when Gore was on the "This Week With Sam & Cokie" he mentioned the site address - we signed up 1000 volunteers in less than two hours.

4) Bad Press
by Signal 11 (#11)

In an increasingly wired society rumors and myths propagate at incredible speeds - how do you diffuse rumors and myths. For example, if I start a rumor that Mr. Gore said he "fathered Linus Torvalds" - how do you diffuse that? Rumors and myths often come about as a minor distortion of the truth which then goes through the "telephone game". How do you keep the public informed about what a candidate /really/ thinks, as opposed to what other people think the candidate thinks?

Ben:

This type of thing is dealt with on case by case basis. Most of the time these things don't even warrant a response. If you respond it only lends credibility to the charge.

5) External links?
by Pseudonymus Bosch (#20)

Linking to another sites is an essential feature of the Web.

Would you recommend linking to another sites from your boss' site? If yes, what kind of sites (supporters, other candidates, ~independent~ media, Slashdot :), supported campaigns)?

Would you object to being linked from another sites, even from opponents?

Ben:

Our links are mostly to voter registration information sites, such as Motor Voter registration forms and the like. As a general rule linking to other sites from a campaign page should be done selectively, because it can potentially detract from the purpose of having a campaign Web site in the first place.

Of course, we have links to download tools like the Adobe Acrobat Reader, RealPlayer, and QuickTime as well.

To the extent which an external link helps Gore supporters in having a better experience on our site we will add them.

This is an evolving area of campaign finance law, and as I understand it, other sites can link into ours, but FEC regulations are very clear in prohibiting links from corporate sites.

6) What's the true measure of success?
by A Big Gnu Thrush (#29)

This Wired article talks about the flood of donations received through McCain's Web site after a win in NH. Increasingly, the most effective form of political activism appears to be cash. While a strong Web presence could promote a dialogue of issues, this does not seem to be taking place.

If a Web site brought in little or no money, could a candidate still view it as successful, or is income the final measure of success?

Ben:

Excellent question. Every campaign has different sets of priorities. Obviously, raising money is a challenge for every campaign and we are no different in that respect. For Gore 2000, using the Internet to expand participation in the political process is more of a priority than using the Internet to raise money. Although we have been very successful in that regard, having raised over 1.1 million online since the site launched last April.

In my humble opinion, the degree to which the Internet is integrated into every aspect of a campaign is the degree to which that campaign will succeed on the Internet. At Gore 2000, it is ubiquitous - almost everything we do has an Internet component - including fundraising. This article, which ran on the New York Times Web site last Saturday, sheds some light onto how the various campaigns are raising money on the Internet.

Over 100,000 people have joined our online community, by volunteering, signing up for Gore Mail, or joining our voter outreach programs. This has allowed many people to get to know Al Gore, ask him questions, and become connected to the process. By that measure, our site and our Internet campaign have been a tremendous success thus far.

7) Interactivity in sites?
by Saige (#47)

The current political candidate sites seem to be little more than political rhetoric and volunteer information. Are there any plans to treat the Web site differently than a broadcast medium? I mean, including interactivity, such as message areas for open discussions, polling booths to get a feel for what people are really interested in. And also perhaps for offering large amounts of data about a candidate's past actions in government, such as voting records (and perhaps reasons for the vote).

Ben:

Our site offers users two-way communication and a vast amount of information on all things Gore. Of course there is a lot more we can do, and as the campaign progresses you will see the addition of more features that facilitate greater interactivity. We are also getting a steady flow of great ideas and insight from those that know the Internet best.

8)How long will the site be up?
by Pseudonymus Bosch

Disk space is cheap.

Will somebody maintain the site up after the election, even as a frozen site? It will be valuable for historians (and electors who would check the promises).

Ben:

One of my colleagues here has the greatest (and largest) collection of political memorabilia I have ever seen. In fact, it is so large that he recently added a 2000 sq. foot addition to his house to accommodate it. Our plan is to archive the site at this facility, which is not far from Nashville and is complete with a DSL connection. If anyone has any ideas about this, please feel free to e-mail me (ben@min.net) about them.

9) How does the Web site affect the candidate?
by Silas (#62)

Many of the questions posted so far ask you to discuss how the Web site and its upkeep influence the voters and the campaign. I'd like to you to discuss how having a Web site affects the candidate, his views, his methods, his public personality.

That's my main question, here are some points to ponder:

It seems that having a Web site as large and significant to the campaign as Gore's or most of the others would tend to force them to be more responsible, to be held more accountable for each and every utterance. In a world where disinformation and twisting of facts is commonplace in the popular media, how does a Web site like yours influence the candidate's` ability to take advantage of this?

Are Gore or any of the others more or less likely to refer back to their campaign managers and Web site before making statements about policy and moral issues? Or is it just as easy to perform an "about face" because the Web site can be updated just as quickly? Can campaigners now say "please see the FOO section of my Web site" instead of answering questions about specific issues?

Ben:

Al Gore visits algore2000.com every day, and I get regular feedback from him - and ideas for what we can do with the site. He frequently mentions the url at campaign appearances, and is so familiar with the content that he can direct people to its various sections when asked about specific issues. His detailed knowledge of policy and issues allows him to interact with voters AND refer them to the Web site at any time.

10) Lowest common denominator
by BOredAtWork (#195)

I'm a 20 year old male; this will be the first time I can vote in a presidential election. I am one of your target demographics. I'm a student; so my time to research the candidates is limited. One of my major sources of information is the Web - cnn.com and the various candidate sites in particular. At this point, my vote is up for grabs.

Algore2000 is a good site. I'm sure there was countless hours of thought put into each and every detail, especially the "agenda" page. That page in particular is a work of persuasive art, right down to the picture of Al with a pair of cops (tough on crime), and the (over)use of red, white and blue. The list of catch phrases is an especially nice touch; who could possibly NOT support "Saving Our Schools," "Fighting for America's Seniors" and "Improving Health Care," right?

My question for you, sir, has to be this: Why does algore2000.com seem to think I'm a fool? Am I supposed to be genuinely impressed by the load of press releases and speeches? I hate to break the news to you, but I want to see real content, NOT glazed over executive summaries. Take for instance something VERY relevant to me as a college student - the link from the front page about Al's Plan to Make College More Affordable. It leads here. The extent of the "details" stated is this:

"Gore announced new details of his National Tuition Savings Program, which is designed to help families save for college. The plan allows families to invest funds in an account where their money will be protected from inflation and can be withdrawn to pay for higher education expenses tax-free. The plan will also guarantee the cost of college tuition at any participating college or university in the country."

The rest of the press release is all fluff. No mention of whether this is limited to public or private universities, 2 or 4 year degrees, graduate school, part or full time study, etc. And this is the *basic* stuff. I'm also interested in why this would be a better option than, say, investing in short-term CD's.

That's just ONE example from the many I could have chosen. Nearly all the "content" of algore2000.com is fluff. And shots at Bill Bradley. The simple fact is this does not impress me. Actually, since this site represents Al Gore, I'm inclined to believe Al relatively clueless - if he wasn't, surely he'd tell us HOW he plans to fund his proposed programs, tax cuts, etc. Any politician can CLAIM to support any number of things. Algore2000 picks popular issues, and loads the wording of them such that ANYONE would be nearly forced to agree. Come on, who on earth DOESN'T support "A better educational system?"

What I could like to see from algore2000.com, as well as EVERY OTHER CANDIDATE is DETAILS. I want to know HOW you plan to provide a tax cut - will this come at the expense of the defense budget? Money always comes from somewhere; I want to know what has to be CUT to lower taxes. And don't tell me "unnecessary pork" or some trite answer. I want to see numbers.

And I want a big ass chart, with a column for every candidate, and a row for every issue. "Do you support abortion as it currently stands? y/n" "Do you support the abolition of legal abortion under all circumstances? y/n" "Do you support abortion under limited circumstances? If so, when?" Things like that. REAL questions. Some more: "Do you support the reverse engineering of software for porting and compatibility purposes?" "Do you support CDA in its current form?" And more of the like. I don't want to read "Al Gore supports technology and innovation" - I want to read HOW he supports them.

Simply put, algore2000.com seems to play to the lowest common denominator - the average american, who sadly enough has little interest in politics, and little technical knowledge. I think this is a mistake; this audience doesn't read political advocacy Web sites on a wide basis. You'd do better to use the Web site to provide details and elaborate on Al's statements and ideas rather than just rehash them.

One more side note: I followed Jesse Ventura's campaign slightly - I don't know his stance on most of the issues. I dont live in Minnesota, so I didn't take the time to research him. What I DO know is that I was very impressed when a reporter asked him if he supported some obscure bill I'd never heard of. Ventura replied something like "Well, to be honest, I'm not familiar with that at all. I'm not gonna lie to you; I don't know everything, or have all the answers you wanna hear. But I learn fast; I'll read up on it." When can we expect Al Gore to say something like THAT?

Ben:

Ø Algore2000 is a good site.

Well, that's a good start. I like this guy already.

Ø Why does algore2000.com seem to think I'm a fool?

Hmmmmm. Sounds like he changed his mind. Uh-oh.

>Nearly all the "content" of algore2000.com is fluff.

I disagree.

> Simply put, algore2000.com seems to play to the lowest common denominator - the average american, who sadly enough has little interest in politics, and little technical knowledge.

To answer this question in all candor, I would remind everyone that the average American is our target audience! However - I for one take exception to your assertion that "average Americans" have little interest in politics or technology. Working on this and other campaigns has shown me that average Americans are driving the demand for technology and therefore are driving the technology industry in this country. The large number of volunteers we have recruited through the site is also and clear indication that we are connecting with people interested in helping the campaign. algore2000.com is for all everyone - not just geeks like you and me. Our site has the most content, the most detailed content, more interactive features of ANY of the presidential campaign sites - AND it runs on Linux and PHP!

Hey - don't get me wrong - you and I know that we can always do better with our Web sites - so your point is well taken.

Thanks, and now I'm going back to my duties as Al Gore's Webmaster.

Comments

So he is playing to the lowest common denominator<

[Anonymous Coward]

Our site has...more interactive features of ANY of the presidential campaign sites - AND it runs on Linux and PHP!

So here you admit to playing to the lowest common denominator while saying you aren't. The American public (fools that they are) love flash and glitz. When I go to vote this November, I will not vote for Al Gore. This is not because of this statement but because I know his platform and what his stance on many issues are. So here, you try to cover your candidates political thoughts with glitz and flash and hope to find from America the fact that your candidate would turn this wonderful country into a socialist worker's paradise, given the chance.

Re:politics

[BOredAtWork]

That question had EVERY reason to appear on the page. I'm not suggesting anything at all about Gore's views. I was asking why they made a site that caters to the masses, when it's not the masses that READ the site. I was asking why they made a site that just regurgitates old news, rather than using the medium to FURTHER explain Gore's plan. Please, explain to me how exactly that is a borderline troll? That site is fluff. There's no content. I'm simply asking WHY they chose to make it vague rather than use it to compliment the more mainstream mediums like TV and newspaper.

Would I have answered differently? You're damn right I would have. Something along the lines of "well, there's details about the example you gave -a- here -/a-," at the very least. If someone were to hit me with that question, I'd be damn good and sure I give a REAL answer, rather than dodge and weave around it.

See, if you want TECHNICAL stuff about running a site, you should interview cnn.com or yahoo.com staff. The unique thing about algore2000.com is it's PURPOSE. Hence the reason people asked questions related to that. There's more than enough "how to run a high traffic web site" stuff out there now, and if that type of question were to be asked, we'd just get the same old answer.

As for me calling half the nation stupid, I DIDN'T. I said that most people aren't interested in politics. Care to show me a voter-turnout rate that proves me wrong?

--

Geez, aren't you guys ever satisfied?

[Smack]

One of the most important political web sites at the moment conciously choose to switch from Windows to Linux. Yet, none of the comments is slapping this guy on the back. Instead it's just bitch, bitch, bitch. i.e. "He didn't answer the questions in a brutally honest way." "He ignored the questions we didn't ask." If you're always going to be critical of people, even when they're on your side, people are just going to start ignoring you.

What I would have preferred...

[Danse]

Since it wasn't a question that should really be directed at him, I guess we couldn't expect a real answer to the question. Although, if he isn't really a mouthpiece for the Gore campaign, he seems to play one on the Internet. I would have liked to see him at least decide to forward the question to the right person. Just about anything would be better than that lame dodge he wrote.

Pathetic

[Quinn]

Everyone wanted two questions answered: "Do you even know what Open Source is?" and "Do you really believe Al Gore invented the Internet?"

This is a pathetic, horrible excuse for an interview. Has Slashdot descended into the depths of political pandering practiced by popular media?

--

Re:Pathetic

[alkali]

Gore never said he "invented" the Internet. What Gore actually said was the following: "During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet."(*)

There are of course grounds for dispute here: ARPAnet dates to '69, Gore entered Congress in '77. On the other hand, the vast bulk of the growth in the Internet occurred after '77. The question is, then, whether any new government initiative after '77 (as opposed to government programs already in place at that time) can fairly be credited with creating the Internet as we know it today, and if so what if anything did Gore have to do with it?

I suppose some reporter could actually investigate this question -- for all I know, Gore wasn't telling the truth. This would actually require work, however, so don't expect to see this story any time soon. It's easier to run the "I invented the Internet" soundbite, and then ponderously wonder why Gore (!) can't tell the truth.

(*) The details can be found at a site called The Daily Howler, which covers journalists' misreporting of politics. Keeping in mind that the site is run by a college classmate of Gore's, it's pretty nonpartisan -- it regularly defends GOP candidates against the media -- and worth a look. The story on Gore and the Internet is here.

Last question a little too good.

[pschmied]

I have the feeling that the last question demanded a little more response than was given.

I too am a college student who is very busy and whose vote is "up for grabs." I agree with this statement. I would really like to see some more detailed information from the candidates. I, however, take issue with the fact that the average American is _this_ superficial. Maybe I'm a little nieve, but the example of the "how the candidates feel about abortion" infographic is not too terribly deep, and maybe someone could get something from this.

Alas, I think our candidates are getting fluffy. When the issue of not teaching evolution in schools came up, Bill Bradley was the only one who spoke out for evolution. The others skated the issue. This seems like a pretty important issue to me. Might it relate to education in America? Does "I support better education" mean teaching that the world is flat and that the earth is about 4,000 years old?

I think that my vote will probably go to Bradley simply because he is the only liberal (or candidate in general) who appears to have any balls. I am really tired of politicians who don't take a stand on anything at all. My visits to Algore2000 have been a painful reminder that a candidate may "get it" that the Internet can be a valuable tool, but they will almost always misuse it.

A low-content website is as big a slap in the face to the Internet as I can think of. This is the "Information Super-highway" isn't it? Sites that provide media without content merely waste bandwidth and my time.

-Peter

Re:So he is playing to the lowest common denominat

[Signal 11]

Considering this is politics, I'd take every chance I could to recruit a few extra votes... or erase the faux paus Gore made when he claimed he basically created the internet. Try thinking about it in terms of the objective: "What can I do to get elected?" - and then realize that one foot on each side of the issue gets you more votes (playing the middle)... what's the result?

Rather than engineering computer chips or programs a politician engineers voter turnout.. and has a variety of tools at his disposal. That does include lying, evading the question, and retracting statements... AS WELL as being honest and straightforward, setting up websites, engaging in door-to-door campaigning. It's a simple matter of engineering... look at the objective and figure out how to get there.

Also, rather than criticizing his methods, why not criticize the system (and people) which make it a viable and successful method of winning an election?

Bad questions

[thud]

My first reaction to seeing this interview was "What on earth could this guy have to say that's worth reading?" Then I read that allgore2000.com uses linux and then I at least could guess at the purpose of the interview. I'm guessing that the point of the interview was to find out whether the use of linux on a presidential campaign website had any significance. By the answers to the questions, its obvious that it doesn't.

Am I the only one that is not the least bit surprised?

This interview seems like a fishing expidition hoping to catch some deeper meaning that just isn't there. Ben Green seems to at least have some basic common sense and realizes the binefits of using linux. Does that make him special? I don't think so, at least not in the big picture.

In my opinion, which operating system a website uses is irellevant. If you are going to conduct a slashdot related interview someone involved in presidential politics, why interview someone who's day to day activities are no different than thousands of other people behind thousands of other websites? Ben Green is doing nothing special.

I personally do not see the point of interviewing "admins" because quite frankly, while it is news for nerds, it isn't exactly stuff that matters. At the end of an admin interview, you can either guess that the guy has some common sense (he likes linux) or he doesn't.

I really wish slashdot would concentrate on the stuff that matters. If you are going to interview someone in presidential politics about internet related things, find someone who isn't going to say stuff we already know. How many more times do we need to pat ourselves on the back and parade yet another peron through an interview so they can say linux is a good thing?

So who do you suggest?

[grappler]

1. Al Gore: Against Online privacy and pro-government regulation of the internet. Even favors mandatory hardware additions to computers to enable easy goverment access (clipper chips).

2. John McCain: Favors governemnt regulation of the internet. Taxes are only the first step towards deeper regulation. Bureaucracy breeds bureaucracy.

How anyone who is a techno-voter could waste their time pulling the lever for either of these men, I do not know.

So who do you suggest?

I would guess that the right wing conservatives would be worse about this - most are (and I know for sure that George W IS) in bed with the religious right, southern baptist and the like, and nothing would please them more than to legislate morality onto the internet. Sure, they probably wouldn't tax it, but they'd want a stronger version of the CDA for starters...

So basically we draw the conclusion that none of the major candidates support our wishes in the technology arena. Here's my question - should we vote for the one that most closely does (either Gore or McCain, I'm not really sure which) and at least try to get the lesser of the evils, or should we make a statement by choosing a third party candidate that won't win, but whose thinking is more in line with our own?



--
grappler

Re:Bill Bradley

[orcrist]

It seems to me, all things being equal, Bradley is canonically the stronger candidate. He has a coherent vision and a plan, something that Gore doesn't seem to have,

If you remembered Paul Tsongas, you'd realize having a coherent vision and a plan does not a stronger candidate make...

Chris

Thank you for that link!

[Evro]

I took the poll and Al Gore came up as my #1, followed by Bradley, Buchannan (!), Keyes, McCain, and, lastly, Bush. Not what I expected. Of course, this is just a toy survey, but it is a neat toy nonetheless. A neat tool. Thanks for the link!

_________________

Linux?

[QuMa]

I think he 'forgot' the most important reason for choosing linux: It might well get votes. (or at least be an attempt too).

Re:huh?

[SEWilco]

It depends on what your definition of "AND" is.

Re:So he is playing to the lowest common denominat

[0xdeadbeef]

The American public (fools that they are)...
<i>...your candidate turn this wonderful country into a socialist worker's paradise</i>

A wonderful country made up of fools? Do you include yourself among this group?

It's no wonder people turn to socialism, when it's opponents call them idiots and fools unable to lead themselves.

Last Question Hits The Mark

[hanway]

The last question, and the interviewee's dodging any meaningful answer, nails a problem with politics today.

As a test, I tried searching algore2000.com for Tuition, and I found the same briefings mentioned in the question. The gist of it is that apparently Gore has a National Tuition Savings Plan. I assume that there must be something concrete to this Plan because it is capitalized everywhere it is mentioned, but the actual Plan itself does not appear to be available, only press releases mentioning the Plan -- press releases that usually go on to take a potshot at Bradley.

Since I can't find it, I wonder if Gore's National Tuition Savings Plan is anything more than those four words. I think I'll test the interactivity of Gore's site by asking them to produce the Plan document(s).

To be fair, the other candidates' sites are no better. Bradley's site won't let me search, but it will let me watch a quicktime of Michael Jordan, and it assaults me with plenty of popups asking for contributions. McCain's site lets me search press releases, and I find no match on tuition. Searching mccain2000.com for "education" results in some hits, mainly press releases announcing new radio and TV ads. Searching georgewbush.com for "tuition" finds a few hits in press releases, mostly ones quoting republicans taking potshots at McCain.

After doing this little exercise, I've lowered my opinion of all of the candidates. (Some more than others, but only because I didn't have much respect for some of them in the first place.)

!Father of the Internet

[noeld]

"During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet."

Al Gore Mar 1999

If you don't remember check it out on Wired, or the Slashdot Article.

So here is my question did he ever retract this statement?

RootPrompt.org -- Nothing but Unix

Re:!Father of the Internet

[edhall]

It was a poor choice of phrasing, but the fact is that Senator Gore did sponsor the legislation that created NSFNET, which ultimately became what most of us think of as the Internet. At the time, DARPA was cracking down on non-military use of the ARPANET (ultimately creating the MILNET). Most University and Corporate sites (with the exception of those with large military contracts) were to be cut off or forced to pay enormous fees. NSFNET was funded by the National Science Foundation rather than the Pentagon, and although initially limited to research and education, opened the door to access by just about anybody. Commercial restrictions were gradually lifted, and the NSF played a smaller and smaller role (though it still paid for the Internet backbone until just a few years ago). And then things really started to grow like crazy...

As an engineer, what I mean when I say "create" (&nbsp==&nbsp"invent" or "build") is a lot different from what a politician means when he/she says "create" (&nbsp==&nbsp"pass a law" or "spend tax money"). And it was probably one of Gore's staffers and not Gore who actually "got it" on the Internet's potential (both back then and now); he's not shown himself to have any great technical savvy personally. But from his perspective as a politician, "Created the Internet" isn't that far from the truth.

-Ed

Bill Bradley

[Hard_Code]

Bill Bradley's site seems a bit deeper on the detail (although still not as boringly technical as some of us would like...there are numbers though ;)

"Bradley on the Issues"
http://www.billbradley.com/bin/article.pl?path=0 60100/1
(hope that url leads to the right place)

It seems to me, all things being equal, Bradley is canonically the stronger candidate. He has a coherent vision and a plan, something that Gore doesn't seem to have, and is removed from the whole Clinton mess. Unfortunately it seems that Gore has the greater mindshare, and Bill Bradley (like McCain) has an uphill battle against his party's establishment. It's rather unfortunate. We've already lived with Gore for eight years...I'm sure he's a great guy, but it wouldn't hurt to get someone a bit fresher, with somewhat new ideas in office.

Oh yeah, BillBradley.com apparently runs on SunOS, if that matters.

</politics>

Jazilla.org - the Java Mozilla

Re:Bill Bradley

[Hard_Code]

Unfortunately, if you pick your browsers like your politicians, yours would censor all un-American, un-Christian material so as not to soil your soul, and require that you fit into its moral mold.

Jazilla.org - the Java Mozilla

The last question...

[fizban]

Interesting to see that Ben completely changes his style of answering questions from full paragraphs to the "line-by-line" mode of picking at specific statements in the question.

Just another example of how people can't take criticism at all!

Come on Ben! Those were some hard hitting questions, and you went and took the childish approach at answering them. I would expect more from the webmaster of the Gore Presidential Campaign website! When told that your site contains mainly fluff and doesn't contain any stances of real value, you go and defend it as "not for geeks." Come on! Those questions weren't technical in nature! They were about issues that affect all Americans!

I personally would also like to see more than the normal candidate rhetoric on that site. Can't Al Gore take any REAL stands? I guess not. He's been in Washington for too long and takes the normal approach - Say you support something that every American thinks is good, but never act on it or make a plan for achieving it. And of course the webmaster will defend it, because he's getting paid to. Have some integrity and give us what we ask for!

Another election I WON'T vote in - Does it really matter who's in charge?

----
Lyell E. Haynes

Re:Lowest Common Denominator

[sumana]

Good point. I seem to see a common theme in some of these posts; while he is a webmaster, which is Acceptable, Ben has committed the fatal mistake of working for/in the Political System, and even worse, for a Politician! Oh, no, he is perpetuating our horrible two-party, hopelessly outdated obsolete flawed system and therefore he has -- he MUST have -- imbibed and absorbed the fatal flaws of politics, evasiveness, compromise.

Yeah, I wish he'd given a straight answer to that last question, too. But you can always email him to prod him about it.

Re:That last one

[Money__]

I couldn't agree with you more. I agree with that last question and would like to see more details from all the candidates.

I, for one, was impressed when 'Dubya released a detailed list of all his individual contributors to his compain (complete with dollar amounts). This kind of honest and full disclosure is refreshing, and more candidates should follow his lead.
_________________________

Re:That last one

[Sorklin]

My favorite part of the last question is that he didn't answer it. That should be taken straight to Al Gore himself. Don't be content to have more info than the other candidates, actually put up info that I can use. But they'll never do that, cause he wants to be able to flip-flop on any issue. Politics as usual.

But Tipper is a changed woman ;-)

[Jim Tyre]

This is actually the only issue I have with the democratic side. When I hear that name -- "Tipper Gore" -- It's synonomous with "Music Censor". Is "Internet Censor" that far of a stretch?
Ah, but that was then, this is now (or, more correctly, about two months ago). Me, I think the idea of the Gores being in bed (figuratively) with the Zappas is even more frightening, but here's the news item:

NEW YORK (AP) -- Diva Zappa, the late Frank Zappa's 20-year-old daughter, has released her first record with a little help from some well-placed friends: Tipper Gore and her daughter Kristen. The single, ``When the Ball Drops,'' was provided to radio stations on Tuesday. Diva Zappa's 30-year-old brother, Dweezil, wrote the music and she wrote the words. It was recorded in the studio Frank Zappa built in his Los Angeles home. ``Basically this song is about my hunt for someone to make out with for the millennium,'' she said. ``The song went all right but my hunt is failing.'' Vice President Al Gore's wife, who is a friend of Gail Zappa, Diva's mother, played drums and sang backup. Kristen Gore also sang backup, along with Dweezil Zappa's girlfriend, singer Lisa Loeb.

Nice Dodge on the Details question

[alexhmit01]

Okay, the details question was obnoxious. Nobody connected to a campaign will agree with an attack on the American people.

However, when the issue of details was brought up, he COMPLETELY ignored it. I agree, the Internet provides LOTS of room for details, things Stump speaches can't include.

However, as the Clinton's learned in 93, slogans get votes, details earn defeat. A blue print lets people pick on what they dislike (more common that screaming for what you like), so no candidates will give details until they have to.

However, his decision to NOT answer that was inexcusable. I was disappointed with the interview.

I'm sorry, but for questioning a political site, "we run Linux and PHP" doesn't cut it. I don't care if you run Linux on a 386 or a proprietary system on an Iranian company's proprietary hardware (no slams on people from Iran, just picking them as a random "rogue" state), I care about the content. This guy didn't get it.

Hell, we're all voting for Algore because he runs Linux, right?

Screw that, McCain's still my man. Give em hell, John!

Alex

Re:That last one

[Dolohov]

That last question was fantastic, and I'm quite glad that Ben chose to address it -- I'm not sure that his was a response, exactly, but this is at least a start.

I disagree, though, that a web site is necessarily aimed toward the average American. TV ads are aimed toward the average American, and even those have varying level of content and complexity depending on the time of day and the channel on which they air. This particular "channel" is an important one. When Al Gore references his web page in an interview, I personally expect to find -more- information there, not less. The only reason I will let a candidate get away with saying "Check out my webpage at foo.com" is because of the promise of a full opinion, more thoughtful because the candidate has had time to write it. Reading over Ben's responses, I do believe that Gore gives feedback on the page. But I don't believe he's written a word of it. Nor do I believe that George W has written anything on any of the myriad web pages he's sitting on (Does that count as cybersquatting, BTW?)

It comes down to this: Is this web page going to have content, or is it going to be another commercial? Because if it's just another commercial, I'd rather watch TV; at least there a premium is placed on brevity.

Tipper Gore?

[small_dick]

I think it's great that VP Gore is getting some penguin time, but there's one issue that has always concerned me.

Tipper Gore could go on a frenzy of Internet censorship.

Are there any other old farts who care to back me up on this? As I recall, Tipper Gore was the driving force behind a legislation effort designed to "Clean Up Rock Music Lyrics". Was it the "PMRC" or something?

At some point, I hope someone will ask this question -- "Ms. Gore, many old farts remember your leglislative efforts concerning the lyric content of music. First, how familiar are you with Internet content, Second, how offended are you by that content, and Third, as First Lady, what personal campaigns or legislative activities would you find appropriate to "clean up the net", if you found such a cleansing appropriate?"

This is actually the only issue I have with the democratic side. When I hear that name -- "Tipper Gore" -- It's synonomous with "Music Censor". Is "Internet Censor" that far of a stretch?

As always, thanks for the platform, from which i spew.

Bob and Weave

[BOredAtWork]

Well, I'm impressed that my "Why does algore2000.com seem to think I'm a fool" question actually got answered. At least Mr. Green took a shot at it, which is more than most would do, I think. I have to completely disagree with the bulk of the answer itself, though.

ME: Algore2000 is a good site.
HIM: Well, that's a good start. I like this guy already.

It IS a good site. It's meant to present Al in a favorable light, and it does that quite well.

ME: Why does algore2000.com seem to think I'm a fool?
HIM: Hmmmmm. Sounds like he changed his mind. Uh-oh.

Not at all. It IS a good site. It has pretty pictures, quotes, and lots and lots of pages. It looks well done, and presents Al favorably. It also seems to be lacking detailed content, and I get the impression that I'm supposed to be impressed and persuaded by JUST the pictures, and short quotes. It IS a good site, but it DOES seem to treat me like a fool. I didn't change my mind anywhere.

ME: Nearly all the "content" of algore2000.com is fluff.
HIM: I disagree.

Well, you're more than entitled to your opinion. But if that's the best response I can get, well, it sure doesn't do much to change MY opinion, which is the one that still needs won over by election time. I was really hoping for at least an example of some detailed content, especially since I provided that link to the "details" of Al's plan to improve the affordability of college. Getting no rebuttal but "I disagree" to the bulk of the main arguement is disappointing.

ME: Simply put, algore2000.com seems to play to the lowest common denominator - the average american, who sadly enough has little interest in politics, and little technical knowledge.
HIM: To answer this question in all candor, I would remind everyone that the average American is our target audience!

I should certainly hope so. The parties and candidates who forget this go up in smoke.

HIM: However - I for one take exception to your assertion that "average Americans" have little interest in politics or technology. Working on this and other campaigns has shown me that average Americans are driving the demand for technology and therefore are driving the technology industry in this country.

Sorry, you can take exception to it all you like, but every voter turnout rate published backs me up. You're getting roughly HALF of the registered voters turning out for presidential elections lately. And less than that for local and state elections. Not to mention that a large part of America never bothers to even register to vote. If the average american WAS interested in politics, don't you think you'd see more than half of them show up on election day?

As for average americans driving the tech industry, I couldn't agree more. People want better stuff, that much applies to everyone everywhere. But a relatively small portion care HOW that comes about. So long as they can go to Best Buy and buy a machine that'll play Quake III, or hear "You've Got Mail", they don't care how things keep advancing so long as they DO keep advancing. The fact that AOL is so popular supports this - people want technology, but don't care how it works or where it comes from. Plug it in, turn it on, and it damn well better work or most people just aren't interested. That's a long way from having the average american take an active interest in the tech industry.

HIM: The large number of volunteers we have recruited through the site is also and clear indication that we are connecting with people interested in helping the campaign.

Ah, that doesn't necessarily indicate anything. I highly doubt that you've gotten a large number of people who just stumble across the site to say "hey, I wanna help!" My guess (and it is only a guess; I'd be interested in seeing some sort of statistics on it) is that your volunteers came to the site looking for ways to help. People generally go into grocery stores to buy food; the stores don't often say "the large number of bread loaves we sold today is a clear indicator that we make people more hungry".

HIM: algore2000.com is for all everyone - not just geeks like you and me. Our site has the most content, the most detailed content, more interactive features of ANY of the presidential campaign sites - AND it runs on Linux and PHP!

Well, first off, I'm not a "geek". Never liked the term, never will like it. I've got a social life, dammit. I don't need hit with that stereotype just because I read a certain web site.

As for algore2000.com being the best of current presidential sites, I agree totally. And that's really sad. You DO have more content, more interactivity and more detailed content than any other candidate site that I've read. And I'm still disappointed in ALL of them. I still want to see numbers, plans and details to accompany the executive summaries on the web sites.

As for the platform the site runs on, that tells me that YOU have a clue. It doesn't speak a word for Al; I'm relatively sure he told you "get the best possible stuff you can for what we budgeted" - not "run it on Linux because I support the ideals of Free Software."

HIM: Hey - don't get me wrong - you and I know that we can always do better with our Web sites - so your point is well taken.

I'm glad. My vote's still up for grabs; but at least I know Al has some decent people working for him. All in all, you managed to bob and weave around most of the question(s) I had, but I'm impressed with the interview overall.

Oh, I almost forgot... if you're in touch with Al fairly often, why don't ya put in a word or two about the evils of UCITA, crypto control, and CDA-like legislation?

--

Jello Biafra for President!

[Jamie Zawinski]

http://www.angelfire.com/punk/jello2000/

Sure, Al invented the Internet, and Tipper is one of the world's foremost free speech advocates, but can they really hold a candle to the man who wrote California Über Alles and Holiday in Cambodia?

Vote Jello!

politics

[Signal 11]

I'd like to remind everyone that this IS politics here, and while many are going to pout about how their favorite question (does al gore know/like open source? what about that "created the internet" thing?), these are answers that can, and very well may, wind up on the front page of dozens of newspapers. So the lowest-common denominator question is OBVIOUSLY going to be sidestepped - who wants to call their target audience stupid?

Second, the focus, if I may remind everyone again, was to talk about running a website - not a campaign. Many of our questions were borderline trolls for this kind of interview - lowest common denominator shouldn't have even appeared, IMO although I certainly would have liked to have seen a real reply to that it ain't gonna happen.

Give them alittle break.. he's doing his job: doing his best to make sure the man he supports gets elected. Would you have answered any differently given the situation? Answer honestly.

That last one

[m3000]

Am I the only one who really liked that last question? If only more news stories and reporters could ask stuff like that. I think he brought up some really good points, about how campaigns are full of catch phrases, but never any mention of how they plan to do things. And a chart showing exactly where they stand on different issues would be incredibly helpful. It would be like comparison shopping, only for polititians.

Re:That last one

[dkesh]

Try www.vote-smart.org. A long questionnaire on issues, past votes, and evaluations by interest groups.

The interview...

[jd]

...was extremely interesting, IMHO. Remember, it wasn't Al Gore being interviewed, it was his tech guy. Al Gore's views on the Internet, who invented it, and the Loch Ness Monster aren't really that important, here.

This guy is either very politically savvy, or extremely intelligent. Damn right, he can't speak for Al Gore! He's not in his mind! He's not wired Al Gore up to a brain-wave packet sniffer! So how -CAN- he speak for someone else!

I also like his points about moving to Linux. Switching to a system, for stability, security, et al, shows that this is one webmaster who isn't interested in techno-hype, but results. He wanted a system that got results, and so he picked one that got results. Sounds like a technically bright guy!

Nor did he stick with/avoid Microsoft for overt political reasons. That would have been an easy one to do. "We switched from Microsoft because we will not support an illegal monopoly" would have sounded great on a sound-bite, but would show him to be an idiot. The money's been paid. You're not supporting anyone, past that point. All the meaningful support has already been done.

As for the content - hey, guys, ease up on the webmaster! He doesn't get to write Al Gore's speeches, you know! Although he'd probably do a much better job of it. I'm impressed he's done as well as he has, given the material he's had to work with.

If YOU were given Al Gore's speeches, campaigns, et al, do you think you could produce a site nearly as good?

As for him needing to target the average American, that's fair, IMHO, but he SHOULD also have sections that go into topics in rather more depth. Shallow is great, for the surface layers, but there should be detailed examination, deeper in, targetting the UN-average Americans. THEY have a vote, too!

Lowest Common Denominator

[dentin]

The last question, 'lowest common denominator', was one that I would have most liked to see answered. I was very annoyed that the response was utterly content free, like much of the algore site appears to be. I too want to see real answers and specific statements from politicians.

But the thing to remember is that elections are about popularity, and these guys are here to try to get the most votes - and nothing more. If a propaganda web site brings in more votes than a truthful one, the propaganda will win every time. These guys only care about getting elected, and you stand a better chance of being elected if you have more people on your side.

Specifically, people who are easily swayed by propaganda of this sort: the lowest common denominator.

However, I don't think we can find fault with the web master. A question like that should really be directed at the politicians themselves, the policy makers. They are the ones who decide what the content of the site is, and it is unfair to ask a sysadmin why his users refuse to put up anything more than fluff.

-dennis towne