StratML Narrative - Case Use of Votorola?

[Alex Rollin]

 http://u.zelea.com/w/User:Alex.rollin-GmailCom/Vote_Processing
--
Alex

“It’s no longer possible for a country to collapse in isolation. Now we all
collapse.

The only path to stability is to equalize the consumption rates of the first
and developing world. Our dream is no longer possible in the new world.” -
Jared Diamond March 2010



On Sun, Oct 24, 2010 at 3:31 PM, Alex Rollin <alex.rollin at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Thomas!
>
> Thabks for looking at the detail in the rules and commenting on them.
>  Depending on the situation your amendments might be more appropriate, yes.
>
> I had a conversation with Mike about what he called "vote processing" which
> is the filtering of votes on a poll/position witha custom voter list and a
> set of triggers like these rules and the ones you mention.
>
> I made notes from the call wih Mike though theyare a bit messy.  You can
> find them on a sub page coming off my user page on the pollwiki.
>
> My goal is to write all thse rules down as a function of vote processing,
> along with simple usr stories like what this blog post hints at.
>
> In fact I'm not going to move much further ahead on vote processing until I
> spend more energy on crossforum theatre.  Mike and I spoke about it and it
> does seem the logical next step to xomplete the prototype.
>
> At that point, prototype "complete," it will be easier to habe discussions
> about how vote processing could be implented.
>
> Though I'm already a bit rusty from the call with Mike I am a bit clearer
> on the central position of the pollwiki paying more heed to Mike's caution
> of deisgning it out at this stage in the development.
>
> Becaue of this I can see that a few requirements for the crossforum theatre
> ui would be an effort in the right direction of understanding how users will
> interact with the discussion created on a single pollserver, multiple areas
> or divisions, or even multiple pollservers.
>
> The use case we discussed was to give a usr a notification that a diff
> bridge link has been posted to a mailman list that, and the diff eidge link
> is for a poll within an area in which the usrr is registered on the
> pollwiki.
>
> I think stratml is great and I've sent the post to Owen for review, and he
> has sent it o n to others.
>
> One step I do plan to make towars implementation iz to attempt to implement
> a stratml semantic form  in mediawiki. I'm at the early stages having just
> installed the sematic bundle on my mediaiwiki a couple days ago.  I still
> don't know much about it to tell the truth though and hope to make more
> progress in the coming month.  If anyone wants to jump in just let me know!
>
> Once implemented it would be possible to use flaggedRevisions extention to
> implement a portion of the "active strategy document" idea outlined in the
> blog post.
>
> Alex
>
>
> On Oct 24, 2010, at 10:49 AM, Thomas von der Elbe <ThomasvonderElbe at gmx.de>
> wrote:
>
>  Hey Alex,
>>
>> I just read through your text. First, ofc it's easy to imagine how
>> Votorola comes into play. It's the perfect usecase for it.
>>
>> Then, Owen Ambur is one of the active makers of statml and also a member
>> in the metagov-list. We have been talking with him about using stratml in
>> Votorola.
>>
>> Then you write: 10. An active amendment that remains unopposed for 30 days
>> will be integrated into the active strategy document immediately, creating a
>> new version of the active strategy document
>>
>> I see a possible problem. E.g. three bad guys over-float the rest of the
>> group with countless active amandments, until they cannot keep up opposing
>> anymore. I would prefer a majority rule like: at least 60% of the owners
>> must vote for the amandment for at least 4 weeks.
>>
>> Then there is also no more use for: 2. A group of 3 or more owning members
>> may propose an amendment to the active strategy document.
>>
>> Because every single owner could propose one without harm.
>>
>> An additional good thing with Votorola would be: If an amandment can not
>> climb higher then 50% for instance, people can propose improvements for the
>> amandment. You know the tree: Improvements for improvements for improvements
>> for documents. Which pobably makes the most sense, when the number of
>> participants is getting higher.
>>
>> So it all sounds good! Are you actually going to do it? Or how far are you
>> already with the cafe?
>>
>> Mike is off-line for a few days, he'll probably reply later too.
>>
>> Thomas
>>
>>
>> Alex Rollin schrieb:
>>
>>> I wrote this little piece today.  I've spoken in the past about what I
>>> want to use Votorola for.  Basically I want touse it to draft things
>>> democratically.
>>>
>>> I've been involved in a few conversations the last couple of days that
>>> centered on "what is this group doing" in the context of several
>>> groups.
>>>
>>> This little piece uses the drafting and redrafting of a StratML
>>> document as the goal of what is basically a legislative process.
>>>
>>> When you read the piece you might imagine how Votorola would be used
>>> for carrying out the voting and maintaining the draft.
>>>
>>> Well, that's the hope at least ;)
>>>
>>> I realize there are some mismatches, and I wrote it anyways!  Any and
>>> all feedback welcome!
>>>
>>> http://alexrollin.com/content/stratml-production-groups
>>>
>>> Alex Rollin

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://list.reluk.ca/list/votorola/attachments/20101024/75b70bb1/attachment-0007.html>