> But it's more usual that politicians (or their staffs) would be willing to listen to good information, but geeks don't call them.
On what verifiable evidence do you base this claim?
I give you the war on drug users as evidence to counter your view. There's tons of studies (as well as simple common sense) to support legalisation. There is even precedent - the alcohol prohibition in the US, and decriminalisation of cannabis in the Netherlands. The medical evidence is clear, the social studies evidence is clear, the economic evidence is clear. And then there is the little fact that the "war" is a complete and utter failure in its alleged aim of reducing harm, or even reducing consumption. Yet we continue to prosecute hundreds of thousands of people for having done nothing wrong. So where are these politicians that listen to good information?
Another example, recently in Germany a law was proposed (it was summer) to introduce full-scale internet censorship on the excuse of reducing child abuse. The IT industry rallied against it. The digital rights movement rallied against it. Child abuse charities mostly rallied against it. The biggest petition to the federal parliament EVER opposed it. How did politicians respond? By accusing the starter of said petition of supporting child abuse and passing the law. After the change of government implementation of the law was (illegally) suspended by ministerial order and I assume by now the law has been repealed but this is the exception, not the rule. A wide range of other insane laws stands or has only been repealed by the constitutional court, not by political action.