[MG] Votespace social map

[Thomas von der Elbe]

PS: What I also like about this thing (http://debategraph.org/home), it 
behaves like real people trying to find the best place to talk to their 
candidates (who is in the middle and being pressured from all sides). 
And as soon as more space becomes available (because someone left), 
others imediatly use the chance and fill it.



On Tue, 12 Apr 2011 12:00, Thomas von der Elbe wrote:
>
>> The radial layout is Thomas's idea.  The angle for each voter will be
>> calculated from an alphabetical hash of the username (poorly simulated
>> here by random numbers).  So if a voter withdrew his vote, then he'd
>> vanish from the tree, but there'd be no other effect on the vote
>> structure.  This kind of stability is required in order to support
>> rapid animation across historical vote structures, e.g. when sliding
>> time controls backward and foreward.
>
> Mike, this thing here made me thinking: http://debategraph.org/home
> It does change all the time, but it also very fast opens up a new 
> node. If the time control was sliding backwards 20 events and it would 
> directly jump to it and not show the ones in between, it should work, 
> or not?
>
> Then, to have a fixed angle per person has the clear advantage of 
> being easy to recognise even after other things changed. But a 
> disadvantage is the overlapping. Now the old tree-map did also change 
> in case of vote shifts, couldnt it be possible here too? And have all 
> voters in a circle with the same distance to each other ... sorted by 
> number of votes?
>
> Then, with this space around each voter, when climbing one node up in 
> the tree, it would not need to overlap others anymore too. It could 
> just zoom into the map. So like you suggested before, have all 
> (millions) voters visible in the first picture already, only that they 
> be very tiny the further away from the endcandidate. And to really see 
> them one would have to zoom in. Always a circle of voters around each 
> voter, but the circle most far up in one branch would not even touch 
> the circles of the neighbours branch. It would be really 2-dimensional 
> whereas the current proposal is semi-3-dimensional.
>
>> Myself, I'm starting to think that the inverse video in the theatre
>> app could be a mistake.  It could cause us trouble in future: hard on
>> the eyes; hard to ensure that a faded background graphic is still
>> visible across all hardware.
>
> By "inverse video" you mean the ability to slide the time contral 
> backwards? I think this is very very useful, isnt it?
>
> Thomas
>
> _______________________________________________
> Start : a mailing list of the Metagovernment project
> http://www.metagovernment.org/
> Post to the list: Start at metagovernment.org
> Manage subscription: 
> http://metagovernment.org/mailman/listinfo/start_metagovernment.org
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://metagovernment.org/pipermail/start_metagovernment.org/attachments/20110412/a5da641b/attachment.html>


Originally posted to the mailing list of the Metagovernment Project:
http://metagovernment.org/mailman/listinfo/start_metagovernment.org