Re: [Ag Meinungsfindungstool] Audio protocol of todays cooperation meeting with Michael Allan from Votorola

["marc" <marc AT merkstduwas.de>]

Hi Mike,

You asked:

> Folks, I'm surprised to learn that AG MFT provides no facility to
> express agreement at the level of whole issues, such as texts
> (macro-voting).  Maybe I was misled by the name qKonsens, which looks
> like "consensus" in English.  Or maybe by my assumption that Daniel's
> project (which I think does allow for macro-consensus) was part of
> your effort.  Does AG MFT *want* a primary macro-voting facility?

AG MFT do not have concrete implementations in place right now. In general 
we would like to enable tools (or services) to interchange data so that 
users can freely choose their favorite tools. The tools (or services) are 
provided by other projects than AG MFT.

But to proof our basic idea of an open discussion system enabling data 
exchange based on an Ontology and a Web API, we are developing the d!sco 
prototype that might evolve into a reference implementation later.

We do have contact to fundiert-entscheiden.de and probble.de, but both are 
more problem solving platforms than primary voting systems. While probble.de 
is moving forward very fast, we have no current status of 
fundiert-entscheiden.de unfortunately.

The qKonsens (qualifizierter Konsens; qualified consensus) is currently 
'just' a theory in the domain of drafting systems. Wolfgang is currently off 
for a not foreseeable time, so this is on hold.

Daniel's project (www.wiki9999.org) is currently more or less on hold also.

> If you've been following the other thread, then you know I have a
> larger plan: (1) use Disco as a transport layer for a mirroring
> inter-network; (2) use the mirroring inter-network to support open
> electoral primaries across toolsets and across parties; and (3) use
> the sex-appeal of that project (taking down the party system) to pull
> in further development resources.  To get that started, we'd need at
> least one other person to commit serious time.  Either:

The d!sco prototype is a single node within the d!sco P2P network, not more 
not less, while the d!sco Ontologie and the d!sco Web API are 'just' part of 
the Common Discussion Standard that is open to everyone and therefore free 
to be implemented by whoever wants to.

>  (a) A second experienced developer.  He would add the mirroring
>      support and (if necessary) electoral support to the other voting
>      software (non-Votorola).

Maybe I have an idea here. But let me check this first...

>      Or,
>
>  (b) An experienced project manager.  While I was modifying both
>      Votorola and the other software (maybe LiquidFeedback), the
>      manager would scout for a second developer and generally keep
>      things moving forward.

;o)))

> Unfortunately, I couldn't work without this second person.  I thought
> you already had another macro-voting developer (a), or I would not
> have taken up so much of your time with all these threads.  But maybe
> we can still move forward.  Please let me know what you think.

I think AG MFT should discuss this in our weekly monday mumble.

So, please be patient. We'll come bacjk to you soon...

Cheers
marc