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

[Ed Pastore <epastore AT metagovernment.org>]

I don't think I have any objections, though I'm still unclear on what is 
involved in step a. Does it take the form of additions to the existing 
Metagov wiki? And if so, where would the "switch" appear? In the User 
Preferences?

Also, what do you need from me to deploy?


On Nov 18, 2012, at 4:33 AM, Thomas von der Elbe wrote:

> On Sat, 17 Nov 2012 13:38, Michael Allan wrote:
>> 
>> Or, if nobody has a strong preference, then we might begin now.  Step
>> (a) is easily reversible if objections happen to arise later
> 
> Ok, I didn't know, that it is so easy to reverse.
> 
> Then +1 from me.
> What do others think?
> 
> Thomas
> 
> 
> 
> 
> , 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
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Start : a mailing list of the Metagovernment project
>> http://www.metagovernment.org/
>> Post to the list: Start AT metagovernment.org
>> Manage subscription: 
>> http://metagovernment.org/mailman/listinfo/start_metagovernment.org
>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Start : a mailing list of the Metagovernment project
> http://www.metagovernment.org/
> Post to the list: Start AT metagovernment.org
> Manage subscription: 
> http://metagovernment.org/mailman/listinfo/start_metagovernment.org