Re: [Ag Meinungsfindungstool] Requirements in regard to split opinion formation

[Slash <pirate_slash AT yahoo.com>]

My 2 cents:
Basically it's worth it a try and everyone can and is supposed to do what
he wants. My personal view, however, is, that it would be more real
transparent, if the end results of such developments were stressed.
The way up to these end results often contains information, which
consist of mistaken assumptions and so are practically 'noise'.
That's why I think that truthmapping.com's approach is very
interesting:
http://youtu.be/T8XgPDs_pHc

But nevertheless, of course, I think that this intersteps still should
be accessable for the geeks being keen on the discussion and having
the time to dive that deep into the discussion.

Greetings,
/ aka Oliver

Michael Allan schrieb:

> This particular opinion expression tool (T2) shows each user's opinion
> as a single dot in some kind of 2-dimensional opinion space. I don't
> know if this a great visualization, but there it is. Other tools may
> improve on it; maybe T1 is better. The user may choose whichever he
> prefers because T1 and T2 are compliant plug-ins of S.
>
> How do you guys feel about opinion expression, as I describe it?
> (Myself, again, I feel it's very important to reveal the shape of
> opinion as it develops. And I think active, continuous expression is
> the best approach. Whether or not this is done with voting mechanisms
> of some stripe is not directly relevant. I shouldn't speak of that.)