Re: [Ag Meinungsfindungstool] (proposal) Metagov as a technical plug-in framework

[Michael Allan <mike AT zelea.com>]

Hi Thomas,

> Now, how should we proceed? I propose, we wait another 7 days for
> possible objections and in case there are none, we go ahead with the
> described steps.

Or, if nobody has a strong preference, then we might begin now.  Step
(a) is easily reversible if objections happen to arise later, and step
(c) allows anyone who objects to turn the switch to the off position.
The steps again are: *

  (a) We deploy the main user interface of Votorola in Metagov web
      pages, including the wiki pages and the mailing list archive.

  (b) We make it known that we want other projects to do the same.  If
      they do not have software with this capability, they can either
      copy ours (we'll help them), or build their own.

  (c) Together with the second project that joins, we develop a
      neutral tool switch.  ...

  (d) All the while, we work (each in our own projects) to ensure our
      toolsets integrate nicely with Metagov practices.

With (a) done (and easy to undo), we can begin to think about (b).
How do we advertise our openness?  What kind of sign do we hang?  (At
this point, too, the issues become less abstract.  So it's easier for
people to voice their opposition and support.)

So we can hold our horses till after next Thursday, or move now.
Whichever we prefer.

Mike

 * 
http://metagovernment.org/pipermail/start_metagovernment.org/2012-November/005130.html


Thomas von der Elbe said:
> On Thu, 15 Nov 2012 2:50, Ed Pastore wrote:
> > It looks like we are starting to come to an understanding, which is
> > wonderful.
> 
> Yes, looks like it! :-)
> 
> Now, how should we proceed? I propose, we wait another 7 days for 
> possible objections and in case there are none, we go ahead with the 
> described steps.
> 
> What do you think?
> 
> Thomas