Re: [Ag Meinungsfindungstool] Pirate Party Germany - "Opinion Forming Tool" (Working Group) - Next Meeting

[Michael Allan <mike AT zelea.com>]

Alex and Marc,

Thanks again for inviting me to yesterday's meeting.  Thanks also to
Ronald for presenting.

Marc said:
> So that way I personally see Votorola (as far as I understand it) in
> the genre of 'Discussion Systems'. ...

Yes, I see my mistake.  You and Alex are correct.

> But the most important point is, that there is an evolution of the
> 'Discussion System' by design due to competion between different
> implementations of specific solutions for 'discussion techniques'
> and 'opinion forming'.

I agree.  The crucial thing is to have a free choice of tools and
practices, especially for the individual user.


Alex said:
> It's no problem that the OVN is defunct. It's about the concept
> which is of interest to us.
> Would be great if someone could explain the idea behind it.

The technical idea is summarized here: (see also links at left)
http://zelea.com/project/outcast/_overview.xht

This shows a "discussion system" in AG terminology.  It shows the
discussion media themselves at right (mailing lists, chat rooms, etc)
plus other facilities that are related to discussion and necessary for
opinion formation (Meinungsfindungs).  In this picture, however, the
problem of free choice is shown only for the voting media, where it is
labeled "free range voting".  For the other media, we assume the
individual already has freedom of choice.

> What about the "Diff Functionality"?

It shows up as the "difference bridge" in this more detailed picture:
http://zelea.com/project/votorola/d/architecture.xht

This picture also expresses the problem of free choice in drafting and
discussion media in the context of Votorola.  Here the question is,
"How does the Votorola vote-server connect to all the various drafting
media that users might choose?  And discussion media?"

Part of the answer is the difference bridge and part is Crossforum
Theatre (a UI framework).  But these solutions won't necessarily
translate to other voting media, or to other opinion forming tools.
So this second picture is probably too specific; it's not the whole
"ecosystem".

> So did you ever think of trying to incorporate "Vilfredo goes to
> athens" as a micro discussion mechanism where votorola has none?

Yes, and this remains open as a possibility.  But no special interface
is required to connect with a brainstorming medium like Vilfredo, at
least not in the first instance.  The users can simply carry the
results across manually.

> Will Votorola offer plugins to enable implementing different
> discussion mediums?

Yes, or rather to connect with existing discussion media that are
already implemented *external* to Votorola.  Likewise for drafting
media and any other facilities where the day-to-day work is done,
including competing vote-servers.  Our strategy is to connect with
what's already out there, and to facilitate others connecting with us.
Plugins and other specializing components are required to implement
the connections, just as you say.

> Could you give a presentation for the pirate party working group?
>
> Thomas will probably give one, not tomorrow, but the next monday
> after tomorrow.
>
> Maybe you could talk to Thomas and eventually you could give a
> complementary talk thats more about the technical details.

Sure, thanks for the invitation.

> >  ** "Information media" or "information system" is perhaps not a
> >     good name for this category.  All three corners of the
> >     triangle are concerned with informational content.
> 
> Maybe.  So could you make suggestions for a better name? :-)

"Information" seems too broad, and "fact" too narrow.  Maybe
"knowledge system"?

-- 
Michael Allan

Toronto, +1 416-699-9528
http://zelea.com/