The online petition is the Internet Activist's most favoured publicity tool; ideally, it will mobilise hundreds, thousands, even millions, to express their support of their cause and so pressure organisations or governments into change. And it will do all of this in the time it takes to write one email or a simple HTML page.

Except, of course, there has not been a single online petition that has succeeded. How do we define success, though? And for that matter, a petition (we'll get to the online part later)?

Consulting the Encyclopaedia Britannica, it tells us:

"[A petition is a] written instrument directed to some individual, official, legislative body, or court in order to redress a grievance or to request the granting of a favour. Petitions are also used to collect signatures to enable a candidate to get on a ballot or to put an issue before the electorate. They are also used to pressure representatives and deputies to vote in a certain way."

Clearly the latter definition is what we're talking about here. A petition aims to convince a representative, organisation or government that there are sufficiently large numbers concerned in a particular issue that the course of action recommended by the petitioner should be enacted (got all that?).

It's obviously in the petitioner's best interest to sign up as many people as possible in order to make public opinion to appear more in line with their aims. This unfortunately results in more or less dishonest methods in signing up more people; perhaps they'll mislead people as to the nature of the piece of paper they are putting their name and address on, or maybe they'll just falsify names. In any case, the recorded number of people on a petition is in no way going to accurately represent the number of individuals who actually wrote their names down fully cognizant of what they were supporting.

Consequently, when we see people walking up to 10 Downing Street or the White House bearing stacks upon stacks of petitions, we can bet that a significant proportion of those signatures really aren't worth the paper they're signed on. Not that that really matters - do we honestly think that the petitionee actually counts and checks up on the veracity of every single signature?

Online petitions further devalue the concept; it's now even easier to falsify records and sign up individuals who really haven't a clue of what they're doing. You have to think - does the opinion of an ignorant if not completely apathetic individual really count towards the organisation or government that the petition is going to? No, because he or she probably doesn't give a damn whether the petition succeeds or not - he's not going to do anything of his own accord that takes more than the ten seconds required to write his name down. When you venture down the rungs to email or Internet petitions, you finally appreciate the utter worthlessness of the whole concept when you can 'sign' it with the click of a button.

And all of this is before we get to thinking whether petitions are even effective. Sure, we can say that a petition is successful if it results in the aims of the petitioner being achieved, but it's a rare or more likely non-existant petition that succeeds on its own, without any other kind of publicity, public pressure group or media support.

Petitions as they are now, and on their own, have no worth.

Conducted in consort with a whole arsenal of other pressure and outreach activities though, petitions can be a useful weapon to give an idea of the popular support behind the petitioner, and also to drum up media interest.

Yet even then, they're hardly worth the bother - real life petitions, that is, since they tie up so many useful volunteers. Online petitions are a different thing, since they tie up no-one, but we've already established that they have absolutely no veracity, and we don't know whether the people signing them really care or understand about the cause.

But how do we tell is someone really cares or understands a cause? When do we start taking people seriously?

Is it when they get out on the streets and roads and public spaces? When they run a hundred miles, or climb a mountain, or sail around the world? When they tirelessly write letters and articles about their cause? When they give presentations and speeches to everyone who'll take them?

We take people seriously when we see that they have invested time in what they are doing. Time is truly our most important commidity, and you only spend it in non-leisure activities when you feel you really have to.

An investment of time doesn't immediately mean that their cause is worthwhile - you have to see if they understand it (something that can only be done subjectively for each person) and you have to see if they have the support of others - but it's a start.

Petitions require zero investment of time, and so they don't deserve to be taken seriously. However, if a petition was devised that required an investment of time, as long as this investment was made apparent, it would be taken much more seriously.

A 'time-investment petition' has already been established. It's called letter writing. When you write a letter, the person reading it will appreciate the time you took composing it, even if he or she doesn't agree with you. A thousand letters go unimaginably further than a thousand names on a petition; that much is obvious. Even better, writing an original letter is almost guaranteeing the receiver that you are an individual and your letter is not being falisfied.

Letter writing isn't popular, and no, it's not just because it requires an investment of time. It's also because a large amount of time must be invested in 'peripheral' activities - finding writing paper, getting a pen, getting an envelope, buying a stamp, finding out the address, writing the address, sealing the envelope, posting the envelope. It sounds trivial, yet we know that it is not. It's an inconvenience, and inconveniences can dissuade the best of us from writing a letter.

Of course, in the Internet age, we've also thought of email writing. This does away with all the peripheral activities and streamlines the whole process. The problem is, it still isn't perfect (what is?). Emails aren't taken as seriously as letters, even if they contain the same sentiment, the same words. This is not just because many officials either don't have email or don't read it. It's because email is thought of being transient, fleeting. Nothing like the solid reality of a letter that you can hold and pile up in a corner like all the other similar letters.

And both share one fault - they don't have the advantage of some central system that will count the number of emails or letters sent off. Sure, you can ask people to email, phone or write to you if they've sent off an email or letter. But will those who have written contact you, and won't there be those who'll contact you but haven't written?

You beat me. You guessed it: I think I have a solution to the age-old problem, and why don't I tell you? First, let's recap.

In order to grab attention, you must:

1) Exhibit time-investment
2) As far as possible, prove that each person is genuine and individual
3) Reduce 'peripheral' activites
4) Count the number of submissions

Various aspects of my solution are already apparent from above. The whole solution is to:

• Create a compelling source of information - preferably both off and online - that provides extensive and balanced information about the cause so that individuals can understand it, and so write about it knowledgably.

• Allow for a web-based form that users can write or paste their 'letters' into, along with their contact details and email.

• Allow for a screening process that will identify letters that aren't just junk, but actually show the investment of time.

• Construct a website that will publish these screened letters, along with an identifier but not full contact details. This website will also count the number of screened letters.

• Finally, once the desired number of letters have been submitted, print off every single screened letter along with full contact information and leave in a big parcel on the door of the petitionee.

• Inform the media about the website and you'll have convinced the world that there are a significant number of people who really care about your cause.

It might be expensive to print out all these letters. That's where the beauty of the Internet kicks in. If you're lucky enough to live in America, you can sign up to Paypal for a web system on your site that will allow anyone to donate money towards your cause in an incredibly easy, one-step interface (either using their credit card, or their own Paypal account). Ask every visitor nicely to donate, say, $3 or $5 and your costs will be more than paid for.

If you don't live in America, you can't do this at the time of writing, although I suspect you will be able to very soon, also using Paypal.

Still complaining about website start-up costs, and all that? Well, it really doesn't cost much to set up a system like this and if you shop around, you'll find that $100 will go such a long way that you won't need to spend any more (for a solely web-based operation).

The more cynical and doubtful among you (i.e. ~100% of the readers) will rightfully point out, "If you're going to make people write letters or something along those lines, no-one is going to bother doing it!"

And to that I reply, "Fuck 'em. If they can't be bothered, then the whole thing really doesn't mean enough to them, does it? If they don't care, then they don't count. The entire point of the thing is to highlight the number of people who honestly give a damn."

I don't expect you to fully accept any of this, since however much sense it might make, it hasn't been done before properly. That is, until now - I'm planning to unite all the disparate Mars petitions and letter writing campaigns under the banner of Generation Mars and launch GenMarsWrite. It won't take me too much time (but I will have to invest time which would otherwise have been spent in bed or in front of the TV), and it'll prove to be a highly interesting project.

In time, the whole Generation Mars project will include a list of people, names and addresses and contributions - people who have made an investment in time. They might have entered the GenMars competition, or written a letter, or attended a talk, or donated money (for time is money) - but these will be the true members of Generation Mars.

This method of recognising people who have truthfully invested time and shown that they care and understand about a cause is what I call The Martian Way.

[stands down from soapbox]

Stay tuned...

Adrian Hon, 27th December 2000

Related URLS

Encyclopaedia Britannica definition for a petition

Paypal

Generation Mars

Against Chain Letter Petitions

Commentary on the popular 'Afganistan human rights' online petition