Imagine a participant (Patty) who has some general ideas about how to improve the situation in Iraq. In order to help her better understand the various issues involved in this problem, she will read through the various responses that have been posted to this problem, drawn from many sources and representing a broad spectrum of many points of view. She might also browse through other solutions already posted to this problem to stimulate her own thinking, or to see if she might want to join one of them. If she wants to deal with problems not listed, or to avail herself of resources not made available, she will of course be free to do so, and we will add her choices to our list of target problems and available materials.

After this preliminary research, Patty will follow a simple solution-writing format to post her ideas. The specific aspects that she is interested in addressing are the ongoing insurgency and the challenge of reconstructing the country. She thinks that the U.S. should begin to withdraw troops by December 2007, and continue doing so on a gradual timetable that is completed by May 2008.

She also thinks that the money we save by essentially pulling out of the war should be spent on rebuilding the Iraqi infrastructure, bolstering the economy, and facilitating the country’s political transition and that this spending would be carefully monitored by an objective U.N. commission.

She suggests that additional security forces from other countries, especially neighboring Arab states, could be encouraged to replace some of the withdrawn U.S. troops. In order to offer these countries a greater incentive for getting involved, she proposes that they be offered preferential consideration in all new reconstruction contracts.

In addition, she proposes to help the Iraqi economy by requiring all contractors to employ only Iraqis to do the actual reconstruction work.

Her proposal at this point is just a general sketch of a few specific ideas that she intends to fill in later with the help of her group. In her finalized proposal, she will be asked to discuss how she thinks each of her ideas might be implemented, at what cost to the United States, and with what impact both at home and abroad.

Before submitting this rough statement of her ideas, Patty will be asked to categorize her way of thinking about the problem by attaching several optional “tag” descriptions. These tags will make it easier to match her with other participants who are approaching the problem in a compatible way. For example, Patty will be asked to specify which aspects of the problem she has decided to deal with. These might include specific ideas of: a) what to do about internal economic problems; b) how each of the destroyed infrastructures (e.g. schools, medical facilities, utilities, water supplies, sewage disposal) should be rebuilt, to what level, and in what order; c) political problems and what to do about the potential for civil war, d) the threats posed by terrorists and the insurgency, and what to do if other nations, Arab or otherwise, won’t help, and so on.

Patty would check off at least two of these aspects of the Iraq problem, because her idea is to attempt to facilitate the reconstruction (b) while at the same time improving security (d) by substituting less inflammatory Arab security forces for American ones.

Patty might also identify how she plans to cover program cost deficits, if any are incurred, i.e. by increased taxes of specific kinds, by further borrowing and increasing the national debt, by getting contributions from other nations, philanthropy, etc.

Patty might also describe in a few words what outcomes she hopes to achieve with her solution, and what specific actions she is calling for.

Based on all this information, Patty will be offered the opportunity to choose between several matched groups of compatible people that have selected each other and have room in their group for her. The groups Patty will choose from will all be made up of members:

• Who have chosen the same problem area (in Patty’s case, Iraq);
• Who favor the same basic approach to the situation (gradual withdrawal of troops); and
• Who are interested in the same or complementary aspects of the problem. (Some may have focused on security and reconstruction issues, like Patty did. Others may have focused on how to get the Iraqi economy moving or how to deal with the fact that many Iraqis have low regard for their new political structures and politicians, and for the American soldiers, who some think of unfavorably as invaders or occupiers).

If Patty decides to volunteer to be a face-to-face group facilitator, she will be required to read and become very familiar with the group procedures, ground rules, and facilitation methods that are designed to keep the discussions on topic, product oriented, and productive. As a facilitator, she will be prepared for the task of seeing to it that necessary structures are used and maintained, and that everyone in every group comments on the proposals of everyone else in the group. She will also attempt to get everyone’s questions surfaced, asked, and adequately responded to.

Two of the groups Patty is matched with are meeting online; another one is meeting face-to-face several miles from her home; and a fourth is also meeting face-to-face, but several blocks from her workplace.

Patty will make her choice, and then begin preparing for her first group meeting. Her personal page on the ActivistSolutions.org website now has a new tab – “My Group.” From this group page, Patty can access the proposals written by the other members of her group and make comments on them. She can also access the personal profiles of the other members of the group.

She can set up times to interact with her group mates, either by phone or online chat, so that she can ask and answer questions that come up and they can get to know each other somewhat before she gets together with them for the first meeting. If Patty finds that she really dislikes one or more of the members of her group, she might choose to join a different group, either before or after they meet.

For example, Patty might combine her solutions with John’s and add his interesting new ideas about possible political options for ending the civil war in Iraq. John agrees with Patty about the need to start withdrawal of troops sometime soon, and he also wants to be completely out of Iraq within a year, if possible, and no more than two years. He also agrees that a U.N. commission or U.S. friendly Arab states might better supervise what needs to be done after the United States withdraws.

Once the group begins to meet, its work will include exchanging feedback and suggestions for refining and finalizing ideas. Members of each group will interact both during and between each facilitated meeting.

All proposals will be posted on Solution Exchange, where other participants will be invited to comment on them. Contact between groups will also be encouraged. Inter-group meetings might be set-up by facilitators to explore opportunities for combining similar proposals, and for merging compatible proposals that cover different aspects of an issue.

Consolidating multiple solutions that take similar or compatible approaches to a given problem will obviously give each of the proposers a much better chance to build a larger base of support. Solution Exchange proposers, as well as Dialogue Network proposers, might decide to meet in real time online and discuss the possibilities for combining with each other.

There will be a preset time frame, during which participants in both the Exchange and the Dialogue Network will have the opportunity to review similar solutions to the same problem and the same type of solution as theirs. This will make it possible for participants to merge their proposals with a maximum number of others.