Thanks for writing this! I always like to remind people that there is a science to running a good public forum, but that a lot of it comes down to people actually knowing and trusting each other. Beyond that, there’s also just way better (and evidence-backed!) ways to facilitate constructive conversations about urban design that I rarely see implemented.
I've seen some good examples about constructive forums. One of the frequently overlooked keys is the Why. Some meetings are intended to be informational/educational while others are intended to solicit opinions/votes. Sometimes it's a mix. No matter what, facilitators have to keep the Why in mind.
I love your writing style. Will you check my Substack when you have some time….? This is not a cheap shot. It’s genuine admiration for your article and hence a genuine invitation to read mine. With my best , Ronnie
Thanks for writing this! I always like to remind people that there is a science to running a good public forum, but that a lot of it comes down to people actually knowing and trusting each other. Beyond that, there’s also just way better (and evidence-backed!) ways to facilitate constructive conversations about urban design that I rarely see implemented.
Curious if you’re also familiar with the use of more intentional, deliberative methods in public engagement: https://escholarship.org/uc/item/4gr9b2v5
I've seen some good examples about constructive forums. One of the frequently overlooked keys is the Why. Some meetings are intended to be informational/educational while others are intended to solicit opinions/votes. Sometimes it's a mix. No matter what, facilitators have to keep the Why in mind.
Damn. That’s some fine writing. Salute. I’m Ronnie and I have limited access to reality
Thanks Ronnie. :)
I love your writing style. Will you check my Substack when you have some time….? This is not a cheap shot. It’s genuine admiration for your article and hence a genuine invitation to read mine. With my best , Ronnie