kickAAS: A stone thrown into the water . . .: "This is an experiment because it is quite possibly the first time the new medium of weblogs has been used for such an ambitious (non party) political end – the abolition of all agricultural subsidies. It is a massive task. All we have done is to throw a stone into the water to see what ripples it makes."

hmmm, well, yes, that's true. All they've done is make a dramatic gesture, the infosphere equivalent of streaking, and have now reached the uncomfortable moment when the first intimations of doubt tickle the back mind as they realize that they've exposed themselves and may not have the equipment to bear close scrutiny with confidence. They need to either keep running and trust motion to blur the picture, or simply make an exit.

In the comments Reuben notes that "My fear is that by being campaign-based (anti-subsidies) rather than issue-based ("subsidies: discuss"), you may actually draw less people to the issue and thus do less good."

Reuben is right that a campaign-based approach to subsidies will quickly fall flat. Only the nerdiest wonks can maintain fist-in-the-air fervor about such a bloodless issue. However, an issues based approach would require our streaker to undergo a short arm inspection and cavity search in public. An issues-based approach would reveal that agriculture isn't simply an industry that manufactures food and fiber and so would undermine their economically and socially naive arguments.

So, there it is. They've tossed a pebble and have nothing more to say. End of story.