In today’s posts, Eric Reeves and Erin Mazursky both argue forcefully that “noise” is not enough. In contrast to Marc Gustafson’s post yesterday, which suggested that SDC advocates may have transitioned from noise-making to policy recommendations too quickly, Reeves argues that they didn’t move quickly enough. Mazursky adds to the mix a point that I am also coming upon time and time again – namely that independent of its impact on the policy process, advocates may need to have policy prescriptions in order to sustain a movement. If there is no reasonable sounding pathway to improving he situation, then what is the incentive for citizens to get engaged in the first place?