My mother and her neighbor (both deceased) never came to complete agreement about how to maintain their lawns. He politely explained his methods. She politely ignored him. The delimitation between the two lawns was obvious. His looked greener, taller, luxuriant, and healthier. Hers was close-cropped and variegated. Mom continually re-seeded and dumped chemicals on dandelions. I never saw him use fertilizer, a pump sprayer, or other esoteric tools. He might have watered sometimes, but he had no irrigation system. And he had no dandelions or other weeds in his lawn; just grass. He tried to explain to my mother the simplicity of lawncare: let it grow, and don't cut it too close. He had noticed long ago that as the grass grows, the blades widen. Wide grass blades shade the soil better, and help it to retain moisture (in addition to providing a larger chlorophyll factory). Dandelion seeds never penetrated the phalanx of grass blades. Grass spreads by stolons (or rhizomes, if they're underground). Much grass is a series of stems (culms, technically-speaking) connected by stolons and/or rhizomes. I believe this is what we think of when we use the term "grassroots". I wonder if most of us take one tack or the other when we try to implement change. Perhaps some of us bring out all kinds of tools, gadgets, and concoctions in the effort to force something toward the better. Meanwhile, maybe others embrace simplicity and use methods that might appear more natural. I want to think I'm in the crowd that would use the latter methods. I want to believe that a natural approach presents fewer risks...maybe even less damage. I understand the sledge-hammer, chemical, and sharp-edged tool approach: results are more immediately apparent. I'm just not yet convinced that such tools always bring about the best results.