Re: [Ag Meinungsfindungstool] Votorola and AG MFT

[Michael Allan <mike AT zelea.com>]

Hey Marc,

Sorry you're having trouble with the documentation.  I'll try to help.

> (1) I have read the Votorola story at
> <http://zelea.com/project/votorola/home.html>, but was not able to
> understand it. So my first question is, if you could provide me with
> an abstract that reduces the story to its essence? Maybe that's more
> easy for me to understand?

I assume you're not interested at first in the broader purpose of
Votorola (collective freedom and autonomy).  Instead you're looking
for a clear connection to the concepts of AG MFT.  So please try this:

   I. Here is the before picture, with *no* Votorola:
      http://zelea.com/project/votorola/home.html#LS

      The "system" on the right is almost always a decision system.
      It could be LiquidFeedback (like you expect in AG MFT) or any
      decision system in society.

  II. Here is the after picture *with* Votorola:
      http://zelea.com/project/votorola/home.html#LGS

      Votorola is the "guideway" in the middle, or a part of that
      guideway.  AG-MFT could also be the guideway, or a part of it.

 III. Now all you need to understand is the documentation that comes
      *between* those two pictures:
      http://zelea.com/project/votorola/home.html#invent

      There are two crucical things to understand here:

      A. The Votorola guideway is based mostly on a "method for
         composing consensus texts".

      B. That basic consensus method (in turn) depends on three
         inventions, illustrated in the following pictures:

         (0) http://zelea.com/project/votorola/home.html#UM
         (1) http://zelea.com/project/votorola/home.html#RT
         (2) http://zelea.com/project/votorola/home.html#TV
         (3) http://zelea.com/project/votorola/home.html#P

Please study those pictures, their captions and the surrounding text.
That should explain how Votorola works in concept *without* going into
theories of society, autonomy and morality.

If you get stuck, let me know where exactly.  I'll try to fix things.

> (2) The AG MFT model (big picture), qKonsens and the d!sco network
> is not yet carved in stone! And of course is never meant to be. It
> should and need to evolve over time. We are open to adapt to
> existing projects and systems.  No need from your side to change
> your strategy or system yet. But to help us to better understand how
> Votorola works *under the hood*, I would like to ask wether you
> could point me to some documentation of the structures used by
> Votorola to model *macro voting*.

We combine the freely distributed structure of recombinant text:
(1) http://zelea.com/project/votorola/home.html#RT

With the tree/forest structure of transitive (macro-)voting:
(2) http://zelea.com/project/votorola/home.html#TV

And the impersonal group/component structure of pipes:
(3) http://zelea.com/project/votorola/home.html#P

All of which together yield Votorola's overall model of consensus
formation, which is pictured in (3).  That is also the basic structure
of the Votorola guideway.

The macro-voting sub-model (where macro-voting means formal agreement
on whole issues, as opposed to bits of text, etc.) is only part of
that combined structure, as you see.  Equally important are the text
drafting sub-model (1) and the grouping/composition sub-model (3).
None of these sub-models can be properly understood in isolation.

If we have some ideas on how we might cooperate, then we could look
more deeply into the data structures underlying these sub-models.  Or
whatever else we need.  What to look at depends on what ideas we have.

Anyway, I hope this helps...
If anything's still unclear, please say so.

Mike