"Forgive me but I sense a reluctance on the part of the glider community to do anything proactive"
That's untrue. The gliding community, thanks to the effective safety management by the BGA (who have had the delegated responsibility from the CAA for gliding) has an excellent safety record. I can't remember the numbers off-hand, but the total number of fatailities annually is fewer than ten p.a. (and that's as a result of all forms of accident, not just people colliding) Anybody know how many fatailities p.a. other sectors of the UK aviation community incur ?
One of the things that the community does proactively is to ensure that changes are proportionate and realistic and of benefit to avaition in general. There's a major issue when trying to reduce risk that what seems obvious and beneficial to one sector can be harmful to others. That's why it's important to ensure that any proposals are workable and don't inadvertantly increase the risk of an accident.
If there was a way in which installing a single, common, alerting device which would be usable and reliable within the confines of all GA operators, then I'm sure we'd all support it. The problem currently appears to be twofold - (1) Different sectors are using different methodologies and (b) the CAA is supporting only one 'solution' as being 'approved'. Until we can have a single approved, workable, method then we're going to have to continue embracing see and be seen, use controlled airspace for those who have the platform to use it and accept an element of risk. We need to strive to continue reducing risk but it's never going to be removed 100% and, as iterated above, you need to be careful of unitended consequences of changing something to be "safer" when it in fact makes it more dangerous.