Expert articulators of problems | a derisive term from new Philadelphia Mayor Cherelle Parker

When I was in college, a lot of people criticized activists over "not having solutions" when they articulated problems. 

For decades, I've believed that identifying problems is a worthy skill, even if you don't have "the" answer--especially because many people who think they have "the answer" don't, they have an answer to one eensy element of the whole problem. 

Of course, having a good solution as well as an articulation of the problem is even better. That's what I aim to do in my blogwriting. Although I argue that half of what I write about is systems failure and bad decision making; the other half best practice ("solutions") although not every best practice is universally applicable.

Philadelphia Inquirer columnist Helen Ubiñas is somewhat derisive of the new mayor's declaration of a state of emergency giving the designees for action 100 days to come up with a plan to deal with the city's crime problems, including the massive set of drug markets and decay in the Kensington neighborhood ("Business and Bloodshed").
 

She figures they should focus on doing, that there are already plenty of plans in the bookshelves and computers in city offices ("We’ve finally declared a public safety emergency in Philadelphia. But why do we have to wait to act on it?").

Her column mentions how the Mayor has a term that is derisive of the activists and others who call on the city to constantly do better.  From the PI:

 “Expert articulators of problems,” also know[n] as “AOPs”: These are people who like to point out, for example, that Philly has the highest poverty rate among the 10 largest U.S. cities, but are “very, very, very short on delivering solutions,” as Parker said Tuesday. She is not a fan of AOPs.

Parker is no different from the professors who tried to denigrate our arguments 40 years ago, "because we didn't offer solutions simultaneously with identifying problems."  Note that's an illogical argument.

The failure to not avail oneself of the knowledge and insights of AOPs is close to criminal.  Although granted I joke that there is a fine line between "critical analysis" (me) and "whining" (Greater Greater Washington blog).

Every once in awhile I get "despondent" about DC Government, and all the job interviews I had to no avail (I did get a job offer once, but they then reneged with no explanation--I figure it was because of my "outspokenness").  But all I wanted to do was help to make the city better.

And my all too brief* planning job in Baltimore County proved I was fully capable of working "within the system" without being a super huge PITA, but a PITA nonetheless because I wasn't satisfied with the status quo.  (* Bad timing there too.  I was on a grant.  The director wanted to hire me back, but then wasn't retained after the next election, so I lost my chance.)

Anyway, I am proud to be an AOP.