An Online Collaboration Prototype: Difference between revisions

From wiki.occupyboston.org
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page with "In response to my observations that The GA Process is totally awesome but has some limitations including: * The management of the GA agenda is a difficult process * There is a p...")
 
No edit summary
 
Line 1: Line 1:
In response to my observations that The GA Process is totally awesome but has some limitations including:
In response to my observations that The GA Process is totally awesome! (but has some limitations including:)


* The management of the GA agenda is a difficult process
* The management of the GA agenda is a difficult process
Line 18: Line 18:
In order to facilitate a discussion of these questions I'd like to propose interested parties to take a look at a scalable consensus tool that could be used to try extend the Occupy conversation.
In order to facilitate a discussion of these questions I'd like to propose interested parties to take a look at a scalable consensus tool that could be used to try extend the Occupy conversation.


It can be accessed from"
It can be accessed from:


  http://www.commonsenseus.com/issues/category.php?uku=true&categoryId=64
  http://www.commonsenseus.com/issues/category.php?uku=true&categoryId=64

Latest revision as of 11:26, 30 November 2011

In response to my observations that The GA Process is totally awesome! (but has some limitations including:)

  • The management of the GA agenda is a difficult process
  • There is a practical limit to the number of people that can participate in a GA
  • There are real difficulties (work, family, location, etc.) that prevent all interested parties from being able to participate in every GA
  • Some issues evolve over time

I agree that an online tool is needed to help manage all the Occupy Information.

In addition after attending the OB Summit, and seeing all the great information presented, the questions I walked away with included:

  • How can this process continue?
  • What (if any) conclusions can be drawn?
  • Can all this information be aggregated?
  • Will all this information be aggregated?
  • How should all this information be aggregated?

In order to facilitate a discussion of these questions I'd like to propose interested parties to take a look at a scalable consensus tool that could be used to try extend the Occupy conversation.

It can be accessed from:

http://www.commonsenseus.com/issues/category.php?uku=true&categoryId=64

The current implementation includes:

  • A registration process is defined for Users
    • Currently identity is really minimal but has been set up to be more rigorous if needed
    • Most of the site is not accessible until the user "registers"
    • Currently to register the user only need to provide
      • an email address
      • a password
      • a site name
      • a self assessment of their location on the political spectrum (liberal vs conservative)
  • Issue categories are used to organize Issues
    • Two types of Issues are currently supported
      • Basic Issues allow the user to select only one of the positions defined for the issue
      • Ranked Vote Issues allow the user to select their top three preferences of the positions defined for the issue (with a weighted calculation determining the "winner".
    • Users can add new categories to the system
    • Users can add new issues to an existing category
  • Issues define concerns that users have differing opinions on
    • Users can Select their position on an issue
    • Users can Add more descriptive information (text or links to relevant external data) to better explain the complexity of the Issue
    • Users can Add addition positions to the issue (when the set of positions for the issue is inadequate)
  • Positions define a specific opinion on an Issue
    • Users can Add more descriptive information (text or links to relevant external data) to support the position's opinion
  • In order to control spammers additions to the issue database currently have to be confirmed
    • Several layers of "privileges" are built in to allow different users to have more or less ability to approve changes