Slashdot Mirror
US Seeks Volunteers To Review Broadband Grant Applications
BobB-nw writes with this excerpt from Network World: "The US National Telecommunications and Information Administration, scheduled to distribute $4.7 billion in broadband deployment grants over the next 15 months, will count on volunteers to review grant applications. The NTIA, in a document released this week, asks for people to apply to become volunteer reviewers of the broadband grants. The NTIA's broadband grant program is part of $7.2 billion that the US Congress approved for broadband in a huge economic stimulus package approved earlier this year. ... It's 'a little scary' that volunteers will have the power to accept and reject broadband applications, said Craig Settles, an analyst and president of consulting firm Successful.com. Volunteers may have limited expertise, or they may have biases that aren't evident to the NTIA, he said."
I'm going to become a volunteer grant reviewer, and then only approve grants that promise to bring me free DOCSIS 3.0 to my house ... and WiMax while I'm at it.
If you are one the people behind the scenes in power. But I think elitist statements like this tend to be against the truth. The fact is, most people who are concerned enough about these issues to look at them are, actually, educated about them.
This is my sig.
I'm afraid all the government speak will scare off the everyday joe
?
Not it.
Post each application on Slashdot and we'll all vote on it.
they may have biases
Yeah, because there is never any biased decisions made by government agencies!!
No comprende? Let me type that a little slower for you...
Volunteers may have limited expertise, or they may have biases that aren't evident to the NTIA, he said."
Right, because government employees with limited expertise or biases are so much better than amateurs...
For each argument you make against this can be made against open-source software.
What could possibly go wrong?
"A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - K
Power to the people! >D
Not TFA says 'review' and not 'grant'. The volunteers are going to produce reports, not grant funds. Sheesh.
Sweet. Just what we need, a bunch of /b/tards, trolls, and the dregs of society decideding where the money is going to go. I hope you like fast speeds for torrents, pron, and videos of Hitler.
"Who will help me approve these broadband requests?", said the Big Red Government.
"I will! I will!", said the Comcast manager.
"I will! I will!", said the Time Warner CEO's wife.
"I will! I will!", said Rupert Murdoch's 2nd cousin.
And they did.
...he played upright bass in the pit orchestra for "A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Forum" many years back. Wonder if this is the same guy...
The CB App. What's your 20?
That's a good point. If even half of the people here on Slashdot that were eligible to volunteer would do so, the Slashdot community could have a very powerful impact on the US government's broadband policy.
The upshot is that too many agencies have too much money to cover regulation reviews, RFP development, technical support once RFPs have been issued, reviewers once RFPs have been received, and program officers to oversee awards once they've been made. These problems have been fairly well-known among nonprofits and grant writers for some time; that they're now making it to /. can't help but warm my heart, especially since I think we're writing a BTOP and BIP.
Yay!! I wanna be one of the volunteers!
I think the problem here is further reaching than just getting volunteers to approve $4.7 billion in grants. For instance, why was the USDA tapped to handle the grants? Certified 5-star corn fed angus broadband is coming to your area!
Volunteer with a bias, employee with a bias, hmm.
Why, without your clothes, you're naked, Miss Dudley!
Nearly all "extramural" science/medicine/health grants funded by NIH, NSF, (even parts of DOD), are "peer reviewed" by a similar mechanism, basically VOLUNTEER experts in the field. One gets a tiny "honorarium" and it is ALOT of work. The peer review system in science/medicine is full of problems, but it is also better than any other system yet tried or conceived...
In order to qualify as a "volunteer" for this service you need to be an employed member of the business community relevant to the topic. So-- No, Homeless Bill, and/or Sergi the Special Needs Bus Attendant will not qualify for the program. ... *sigh*
There are two issues here that argue in favor of the government's approach: who says hiring people will be any better or quicker, and whatever happened to the idea of open source? No one gets paid for committing code to an open source project, and no one should suggest that those who do are "losers." You'd need to implement the same kind of safeguards against cronyism with paid people as with volunteers, you'd still have to train them, and they'd still have a nearly impossible task. The issue isn't money (Congress actually allocated money to hire people); it's where and how do you recruit the best people. I'm not so sure asking for volunteers is the worst way of going about this, as I argue further here.
It's 'a little scary' that volunteers will have the power to accept and reject broadband applications, said Craig Settles, an analyst and president of consulting firm Successful.com
It's a little scary that someone who runs something called "Successful.com" is considered credible enough to quote.
"To be considered as a reviewer you must have significant expertise and experience in at least one of the following areas: 1) the design, funding, construction, and operation of broadband networks or public computer centers; 2) broadband-related outreach, training, or education; and 3) innovative programs to increase the demand for broadband services. In addition you must agree to comply with Department of Commerce policies on conflict of interest and confidentiality." http://broadbandusa.sc.egov.usda.gov/files/BTOP%20Peer%20Reviewer%20Letter%207-6%20v2.pdf
So, did anyone RTFA? Did they go and take a look at Mr. Settles web site and notice what he does for a leaving? Well, he helps people deploy broadband setups! And one of his big draws is helping people through the grant process.
Hmm....could his criticism be tied to the fact that this is going to make his job of "influence peddling" a bit more difficult?
There is a strong tradition in the US of volunteers stepping up and doing as good, if not better, job as the so called Pros. Of course these "amateurs" (literally those who do it because of love or passion, check your Greek) are scorned by the "professionals" (literally those who do it solely for money, check you Greek again). And for good reason: the amateurs usually ask awkward questions.
Now, Mr. Settles throws up juries as a strawman to attack this setup. Well, if criminal and civil juries worked the way they did at the founding of our country, or the way Grand Juries do now in many locales, I say, "Sign me up." But if you want to treat me like a mushroom, I this thinking person says, "No thank you!"
I guess you can pay enough indians to vote for what ever you want...
This means more kickbacks for all! I'm all in! I'll volunteer! Send your gifts to...
I've been reading /. for years and I can't for the life of me figure out why no one has hit on the real issue here.
This doesn't have anything to do with trying to get a "fair review" and thus granting the contracts to the best applicants. So... what is it?
It's just more of the typical lazy CYA crap that goes on in government all the time.
1st NTIA worker: Hey we have to grant some broadband contracts.
2nd NTIA worker: How do we pick the best ones without having to do any work while keeping our jobs?
1st NTIA worker: Easy... we get some money to fund a "peer review" process like they did for that other agency! That way the volunteers will do all the work! Then we'll just skew the results to allow us to issue the ones we wanted in the first place. Woot!
2nd NTIA worker: Genius! We'll also cover our asses at the same time, if one of our buddies screws up the contract we can say "but we sent it out for review!". No wonder you get paid the big bucks!
Seriously, I'm sick of government employees being able to hire out their jobs. Isn't this what we pay them for to begin with? They should know the job and they should do the work. They should be saving us money, not looking for way to spend even more while doing even less.
If Settles had read the NTIA announcement, he would have noted that volunteer reviewers will not have the power to accept and reject applications, but instead that instead their "evaluations will be an important factor considered by NTIA in determining whether to award grant funding". Either Settles didn't read the announcement and should have some idea what he is talking about before he shoots his mouth off, or he did read it and he's being deliberately dishonest. Settles then goes on to complain:
This is no more true of volunteers than paid reviewers; relevant to these issues, on the expertise issue, the announcement states: "To be considered as a reviewer you must have significant expertise and experience in at least one of the following areas: 1) the design, funding, construction, and operation of broadband networks or public computer centers; 2) broadband-related outreach, training, or education; and 3) innovative programs to increase the demand for broadband services. In addition you must agree to comply with Department of Commerce policies on conflict of interest and confidentiality." (emphasis added)
Essentially, this are the same kind of requirements that would be put into place for paid reviewers, but Settles real problem is revealed when he says this:
The real problem is that he is that Successful.com is a broadband consulting firm, and that the decision to seek volunteers rather than paid consultants for this task means less total business for broadband consulting firms resulting from the stimulus bill, and more for actual broadband services.
Now where to I apply for the money, and where do I apply to vote? I'm looking forward to approving my $4B project involving laughing all the way to the bank (no need to be greedy, I'll leave a little for the others).
" It's 'a little scary' that volunteers will have the power to accept and reject broadband applications, said Craig Settles, an analyst and president of consulting firm Successful.com. "
It's a little scary that Settles does not understand how, for instance, National Academy panels work. It's volunteer work, too.
That there truly is a certain level of knowledge and expertise that should be a requirement for the "volunteers" to participate. I would hate to think someone like my dad, who is the technological equivalent of a sloth, would have any kind of say over this kind of issue.
I do understand that just the knowledge of the opportunity to volunteer would gleen out quite a large portion of the people you wouldn't want making these kinds of decisions, but all the same, it would be frightening if there was no over-sight involved with these decisions by civilians.
"This is the value of a summer spent and a winter earned"
Volunteer reviewers will be required to have some connection to the broadband industry, although the volunteers will have to comply with rules from NTIA parent agency the U.S. Department of Commerce on conflicts of interest and confidentiality, the NTIA document said. Reviewers must have "significant expertise and experience" in either designing and building broadband networks, educating or training consumers about broadband, or working in programs to increase demand for broadband, the NTIA document said.
This is a lot more reassuring, though reading further on below this part of TFA, they make a valid point in that who would volunteer their time for this, with no personal gain involved? I think that quite a few people would because I would hope that people feel passionate about helping to disseminate broadband to their communities, however people are naturally elusive in regards to their time spent away from their families/friends/moms, especially people in a long work day intensive industry like Telecommunications, and I think the point is valid that not enough people will volunteer much time to something that has no personal benefit.
"This is the value of a summer spent and a winter earned"
The fact is, most people who are concerned enough about these issues to look at them are, actually, educated about them.
When you are on the wrong end of a jury... Just remember these are the people too stupid to find an excuse to get out of it.
I was summoned to show up for jury duty twice. Both tymes I was hoping to be picked to serve on a jury preferably involving drugs, but wasn't even questioned either tyme. Why would I want to serve on a jury? Because it's one of the most important duties of a citizen, as well as a privilege many don' get. Why a drug trial? So I can let politicians know victim-less crimes should never have been made crimes to begin with.
Those who want to weasel out of jury duty, or never vote, do not deserve to complain when politicians do something they don't like. I'm sure China or Cuba may want to take them.
Falcon
Should there be a Law?
I would be willing to sacrifice my time, and give the gift of my knowledge and skills to the task of reviewing grant proposals. But first, let me just right up this grant proposal...
Just saying that we are going to slashdot_effect every single one of them.
their only motivation to do the job is to make sure it gets tilted toward their bias.
Which may mean getting hired by one of the companies if they aren't already working for one.
Falcon
Should there be a Law?
These companies just don't have a motivation to invest in upgrades because there isn't real competition.
Yeap! That's the problem. There is no competition. Either allow anyone and everyone to use the right of ways or separate ownership of infrastructure from ownership of the services the infrastructure can deliver. I don't thing that that many businesses would be willing to pay to lay fiber, but even if a bunch were willing to how many fibers could be laid down in one place? The problem with one business owning the infrastructure is there would not be much if any competition to improve the infrastructure. The only competition would be between different areas or locations.
Falcon
Should there be a Law?
and let me tell you this grant money has so many strings attached you'd be insane to take any of it. Our shop was interested, until the details were released this past week. I would say let the government pay these people for scoring/review since what this ultimately boils down to is that the government is taking a controlling interest in your business if you take the grant/loan. Not being able to sell, merge, pretty much fart (for 10yrs after the 3yr program) without government approval and we don't want to become business partners with the Fed. Quite simply we think we can do much better without having the government in the middle of our business.
http://broadbandusa.sc.egov.usda.gov/files/BTOP%20Peer%20Reviewer%20Letter%207-6%20v2.pdf
I followed the link in the article to the paper that supposedly requested reviewers, and I got a 404.
A cursory scan at the Federal Register notice (Vol. 74 No. 125; Wed July 1 2009) hasn't have anything stick out either as far as volunteers.
Never trust anyone over 90000.
It's the emotional neglect that comes from being the party impaired all the time.
The one who's neglected by a drug user can move on. Otherwise my sister's a victim of a crime as well. I was hit by a moving van after my classes in college that caused a disability. Now my sister has to deal with my finances. So she should be able to sue the employer of the person who hit me too. Actually my whole family has suffered so they all should be able to sue.
Sounds ridiculous doesn't it? Not any more that what you're saying.
To be fair, all of this happens with booze as well, but, to say that drug or drink abuse is victimless is simply not true.
One, what you're describing is not a crime though there may be abuse. Two, it's not drug use that causes it, if anything it's drug abuse that does. In which case it can be handled the same way it is with alcoholics.
Falcon
Should there be a Law?
When I got 'called' I was told that not following the judges orders on how to interpret the law could get a juror held in contempt of court.
Yea, unfortunately some judges try to prevent jury nullification. One of the questions I ask someone running for judgeships is if they support it. I will tell them point blank that I will vote against anyone who opposes the right of citizens to tell politicians a law is bad by using jury nullification, if they don't want citizen jurists judging the merits of laws then I don't want them sitting in judgment of others. If they oppose Fully Informed Juries I oppose them.
Plus there's the whole conscription aspect to be adverse to.
Though I had to go down to the office when summoned for jury duty I was never even questioned. As I said previously I consider jury duty to be one of the most important things citizens can do, and want to serve on a jury myself. There are 4 boxes to be used to defend liberty, soap box, ballot box, jury box, and ammo box. And they should be used in that order. Slashdot is one of my soap boxes. When I use the ballot box I vote, and I do vote, based on the candidates positions on the issues not on what party they are in. Unfortunately I haven't been able to use the jury box, and though I have used the ammo box I haven't in years.
Falcon
Should there be a Law?