[top-politics] Re: How to improve communication on the list?

Re[top-politics] Cyber Discuss & Decide

2007-07-25 01:12:38+0200

It seems to me we are fragmented. Discuss on le Parlement? How many discuss on Bulletin Board? Email lists loose subjects so that is not good. I like WDDM Forum, however it seems people do not bother to log in. If a group exists, the people “hash out” talk things over, and from that come up with ideas for improvement of the group. (community, government, country, family etc.)

Than they present the idea to the group, who further discuss, modify it and perhaps agree on the final outcome.

Could we do this on leParlement, by introducing a topic (such as this) and than people respond their ideas directly to this topic? Than as we come to final outcome(s) they could be put in a separate topic and voted upon?

Please respond directly to this post, so we can build ideas and resolutions like we were just discussing this in the “neighborhood”. Bruce

[top-politics] Re: How to improve communication on the list?

Bruce — 2008-01-23 00:00:27+0100

I agree, the “rule of law” is an agreed upon process. We need to have only one topic per initiative. Than each topic is voted upon based on it’s merit.

As we sort through the issues, we will have the most supported at top. Than we can refine and vote again. When a consensus is obtained we could submit to the Simpol project which would than be considered world wide for vote. Bruce

Re: Re[top-politics] Cyber Discuss & Decide

echarp — 2007-07-27 10:31:05+0200

I agree, we are fragmented and not very focused.

On Wed, Jul 25, 2007 at 01:13:02AM +0200, anon wrote:

> It seems to me we are fragmented. Discuss on le Parlement? How many discuss on > Bulletin Board? Email lists loose subjects so that is not good. I like WDDM > Forum, however it seems people do not bother to log in. If a group exists, the > people “hash out” talk things over, and from that come up with ideas for > improvement of the group. (community, government, country, family etc.)

Parlement is a mix of web forum and mailing list, so theoretically, it could share both its flaws, or its advantages.

Read more… / Lire plus…

As far as I’m concerned, I prefer email, I’ve got nice tools to manage them, they are fast and practical.

Web forums are just a good way to start on things, but it’s almost necessary for many many on the web nowadays!

And there are RSS feeds so that data can be aggregated. You can see all of parlement on google now.

> Than they present the idea to the group, who further discuss, modify it and > perhaps agree on the final outcome.

Definitely.

> Could we do this on leParlement, by introducing a topic (such as this) and than > people respond their ideas directly to this topic? Than as we come to final > outcome(s) they could be put in a separate topic and voted upon?

The notion of “separate topic” is not built in parlement, but you could definitely just create a new topic once you consider it appropriate.

> Please respond directly to this post, so we can build ideas and resolutions > like we were just discussing this in the “neighborhood”. Bruce

Re: Re[top-politics] Cyber Discuss & Decide

eggy — 2007-07-26 12:37:04+0200

Here is my draft outline:
WORLD GOVERNMENT INFRASTRUCTURE

WORLD = ALL human people.

Every human person living on this World, is a World Citizen.

It is bit difficult, but we must develop a method so all World Citizens can run “The World”.

Read more… / Lire plus…

I suggest a World Clearing House (for lack of better term) where everyone is entitled to Initiate a proposal. The Initiator must gather “signatures” for the proposal. This will likely help develop citizens assembly’s. The World Clearinghouse will notify each Country and all concerned of proposed Initiatives.

Much of the new software being developed with electronic + / – votes will be useful in local assemblies. They will need a method to discuss these matters and choose to agree with the Imitative or not. Of course others will also advocate or criticize the Initiative, that is healthy debate.

I suggest 2 million signatures to start, this can be increased / decreased as seen necessary.

The Initiative once adopted would go to a Referendum. Most Country’s have a method to vote, and this could be added to their election. The UN could conduct the Election if a Country did not have an election method. Each Country would tally the vote by actual count and submit to the World Clearing House. A World Omnibus person or agency will also be installed at the World Clearinghouse, and will coordinate the Initiative / Referendum Process for the People.

The decisions of the people will be directives, which need to be accomplished. There will be an elected World Administrative Group, the people will evaluate and approve/deny the infrastructure after the Group develops it. The World Administrative Group will process and delegate the work to accomplish these directives. The World Administrative Group will provide data and audits to show the directive is accomplished or in process. These accounts will be published and sent to all Country’s, and published on the World Website. The World Administrative Group will be responsible for managing the agency’s needed such as health, education, welfare, emergency event resources, security and judicial services.

First Initiatives need to be short and will be of a testing manner until the process is running smooth.

Regards, Bruce

Re: Re[top-politics] Cyber Discuss & Decide

eggy — 2007-07-26 12:33:37+0200

WEll here is an idea… How about we write a World Constitution? We look at the initial outline, and fix that up first.

Than, we can divide it up into preamble, jurisdiction, infrastructure etc.

Anyone on to it?

Bruce

Re: Re[top-politics] Cyber Discuss & Decide

eggy — 2007-07-26 11:53:07+0200

Nw echarp suggests we could do this a bit. Utilize email list etc. But we must post only to the matter being presented.

Perhaps we could have this a PRE-initiative and have it set up a bit different than the Initiative which demands vote or comment, but not repeated comments from diffferent people.

I am testing my idea a bit here. Please jump in and comment.

Bruce

Re: How to improve communication on the list?

echarp — 2007-07-24 14:19:06+0200

I’m afraid the TOP group is rather dead now. Plus it didn’t manage to generate any thing, except interesting conversation on what is transparency.

Well, to me this was interesting.

Don’t hesitate to just join on the main http://leparlement.org page, and discuss there. Or any sub forum, even one you can create (simply use a cool subject for it, the url will be generated from that subject).

Read more… / Lire plus…

There is of course a test forum where anybody can play as they want.

[top-politics] Re: How to improve communication on the list?

2007-07-11 05:40:55+0200

I comment on two "comments, First

This random theme promotion is NOT GOOD. If we look this group, we can not find one single topic where several members decided to solve one single problem till the moment they succeed in that.

So, my first reccomendation about this is this procedure:

1. Articulate the topic 2. Start the topic 3. Invite other members you find would be interested in it 4. All the off topic that suits to that topic on the other themes, move there. 5 If there come out the new questions, articulate them and open new topic or join it to existing topic about it.

Read more… / Lire plus…

Second recommendation would be finding way of articulation of the procedure of how to get conclusions of the topic and conclusions themselves. Yet, first recommendations is the first thing to do.

Bruce comments
I do not think all who “drop in” understand the goal of TP as topic in eParlement nor how to respond to items. I suggest a "face page “first read” which explains this and basic style to post and respond. People do not involve themselves unless they understand the process. They do not want to appear “stupid” or be flamed.

The more information on “how to” the more people will be involved. It they are “comfortable” and feel “accepted” they will participate. We non programmers sometimes feel inferior to the makers of these programs.

So, to enlarge the program, to begin topics, we need to know that is what you want to do.

Perhaps a “test” by beginning to use for issue discussion?

Should we begin on “world issues” rather than local so all the world people can become involved? Bruce

[top-politics] Re: How to improve communication on the list?

echarp — 2006-05-10 09:54:15+0200

On Fri, May 05, 2006 at 07:44:25PM +0200, Markus Schatten wrote:

> Why not take a SourceForge approach as disscused earlier. Issues organized in > projects or organizations. Each project has his own forum, voting system, > wiki etc. where issues can be organized quite well.

I actually have a “book of laws” approach. Where a group of individuals is given a tool used to democratically write those books.

And I would separate the books themselves from their voters, each book elements being approved or not through electoral lists.

Read more… / Lire plus…

Where are managed electoral lists in you opinion? (no one here discusses those lists)

echarp – http://leparlement.org

[top-politics] Re: How to improve communication on the list?

Magnus — 2006-05-09 15:51:43+0200

Area of interset is maybe wrong wording, I mean is it about infrastucture, education, health care in terms of political area. The AD vision is:
There will probably never be thousands of issues since few will be in a state over a certain support ready for a prognostized finalisation (a certain level of the accumulated support depending on the democracy constant set in the system) within say 4 weeks, but still never to be decided upon by reaching the level of 1.
At least not if you filter out political areas that you don’t care about or have delegated.
A lot will never gain any big support at all due the just the fact that people (and polticians today!) can only concentrate on a limited number of issues in the same time.
This is not a problem since good decision making will lead to less problem with old issues giving more space for new issues once the old ones are well handled and finsihed.

So of course we can discuss ways of sorting issues but much will actually be handled automagically by the AD system. There is no need to everyone to read all new issues. If an issue is well written and has good arguments it is possible to promote like in todays political world.
These good proposals will be the only one needed to handle for the average user. They will also be the ones news media will be reporting from.
Bad written, non funded or not liked proposals will never bother the average user.
Only if you have very deep interest in a certain political field, you may choose to watch for new proposals that may have been put.

And finally, as said before, this is not an issue anyway for the current TOP-group.
The issue can well be handled later once we have decided on to start to make decisions at all…using AD or any other democratic principle.