Parlement

Testing

2006-06-27 20:43:41+0200

You can use the system right now:

click on the n more links to drill down into the available elements
click on the links to propose new sub elements
click on or buttons to vote against or for an element

No complex registration required, you can participate anonymously or just fill a pseudo (top right corner) in order to be differentiated. This pseudo can be password protected and email verified, or not. You choose.

I’m open to suggestions and follow closely everything said (every forum also being a mailing list, it’s easy to follow and answer to)!

Tell me what you think!

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

illegale — 2006-05-08 14:41:11+0200

Many, many talk about it, nothing has been done about it. OK, almost nothing, as long as E is doing +1/o/-1 stuff in this moment. Yet, there is no organised manner of fighting non transparency of this group. So, let me start with it on this topic.

First of all, OFF TOPIC. If somebody makes some off topic, it would be rather good to open new topic about it if there is no already topic about it.

In that way, other members who do not lurk trough every single theme all the time, will have oportunity to see that and participate there.

Another thing is that I can notice many very simmilar topics all the way, in the last time usually about lemming stuff.

Re: Anonymity

JackWilliamBell — 2007-04-22 11:27:00+0200

I’ve spent a lot of time thinking about this subject. At this point I am convinced that true anonymity is impossible on the Internet; but effective anonymity is possible. (This has to do with the relative resources and knowledge levels of those trying to track down the identity of a person as opposed to the relative resources and knowledge levels of the person trying to avoid being outed. Obviously governments and large institutions have greater resources and knowledge levels than most individuals.)

More importantly, I think we need to have a reasonably secure way to create anonymous identities: ie identities which a person may use in forums, but only that person can use and which cannot easily be traced back to that person. That way people could speak freely about politics or expose corruption without anyone else being able to pose as them and muddy the message.

Features request

shanghai — 2006-10-10 17:22:08+0200

Put into here all the features requests. I think this might be useful!

[top-politics] Re: Definition of TOP - need to finish our goal

Serge — 2006-09-12 13:53:04+0200

Hey,

Modified the wiki over the weekend, tried to keep the elements while adding some and making it more concise overall. Any comments or reaction?

Best regards,

Serge

top-politics

2006-04-19 13:13:32+0200

This group was started with the goal of creating a network of different initiatives which reside on the TOP (Transparent Open Public) principles of political activities.

We hope that we will soon be able to share concepts, ideas and suggestions about the Internet as a media, OpenSource as a paradigm and Democracy as the ultimate goal.

Re: FAQ? and setup

MacHiavelli — 2007-01-31 22:51:12+0100

Hi there. I am very interested in this project but am having some problems assessing what it does and doesn’t do; I hope someone can explain how i get the tool up and running in order to assess its features.

More generally, I am interested in the web-moderated participative democracy. I am a politics student at an Irish university and interested in sponsoring a project at my college to develop an open source tool that delivers the above functionality. If there are other projects out there in this sphere that you feel are worth knowing about, then please share. Hopefully this can be the beginning of a productive exchange. Thanks and keep up the good work.

<steve@youknowwhoelselovesit.co.uk>

[top-politics] Re: Parlement Version 0.9

Serge — 2006-11-23 23:11:18+0100

Mark,
Your post contains no practical suggestion or constructive part. Failing that, I don’t see a point in discussing any further. It’s really a shame because your very presence on the group shows you have a similar concern to ours in bringing more participation to the political process.
Serge

--—-—_----—-—-—---—~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups “top-politics” group. To post to this group, send email to top-politics@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to top-politics-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/top-politics?hl=en _--—---------——_—--~-

Hidden posts

echarp — 2006-11-03 16:21:13+0100

And I emailed you about this, but I was wondering why so many lines of post appear where there is only a score, ie +1 or other, is it that people actually propose a post with only this in the body, or is it that this is the way a click on the + button is shown? Could we get rid of the clutter?

That’s normal. Each vote is in fact a post. Thus you can actually vote in your posts.

+1 <= here I just voted on what you said!!!

And this is an important feature, because each server can act as a node in a P2P net. The communication protocol being mails.

[top-politics] Re: Definition of TOP - Systematization

Serge — 2006-09-25 19:51:15+0200

Hey,

First of all I agree with Gale that defining a system as TOP although slightly redundant, leaves a lot less room for misinterpretation that “open system” would, and remains concise enough to be acceptable.

Secondly, is it right to say that we agree that the aim of this group is for a TOP system allowing for such things as proxy voting, signal amplification over noise (filters), etc to be implemented freely and easily by any TOP organization wanting to?

If yes, why don’t we start try and get more developpers involved to build on leparlement, defining the specifics of the software, and testing it all the while through using leparlement as a platform for discussion/decision/vote??