[MG] Visualization problems for crossforum theatre

[Ed Pastore]

On Jan 2, 2011, at 7:43 AM, Thomas von der Elbe wrote:

>> Vilfredo is a bit problematic on this, and we have already spoke  
>> about this.
>> But also in general I think changes happen through the days. Hardly  
>> you would be able to see them as they are happening. Unless when  
>> you speak about "fading slowly" you mean, along multiple days or  
>> weeks.
>
> Yes, the idea was, that the fading could also take weeks or months.  
> The fading-rate would be determined by the most active polls ...  
> their blue circle would have the maximum size and would be pulsating  
> with the highest frequency (one time per event). The less active  
> polls would have a comparatively smaller circle and ofc a lower  
> pulsation frequency.

I would think this would then have to be relative to the scope of the  
view. For example, if you combine this with your earlier idea of tying  
the visualization to a geographic map, then you wouldn't want to end  
up zoomed into a view of Berlin where nothing is blue because there is  
massive activity in Beijing at the moment. So each time you pan or  
zoom on the map, the relative blue circles (and perhaps other such  
variables) should re-calculate against the field of view.

This would apply with non-geographic views as well. I guess generally  
I would say that whatever view you are in, all relative values should  
be relative to the contents of that view. Or there should be an option  
to switch between relative and absolute.


On Jan 1, 2011, at 1:34 PM, Pietro Speroni di Fenizio wrote:

> i personally would let people tag questions, and then use the tags to
> map the position of the questions in an n dimensional space. Thus
> defining the distance between questions. Then on the 2D image I would
> use a projection of the n dimensional space using Khonnen map.

Can you think of any way of reconciling this with Thomas' idea of a  
geographic zoom model? The geographic model is much more easily  
intuited by the novice, but it completely excludes non-geographic- 
centric issues.

Conversely, the n-dimensional space organized by organic evaluation of  
tags is the most robust and most likely the best long-term method. But  
it would be difficult for newcomers to orient to. And early on, when  
there isn't a lot of data, it may be sparse and chaotic. Until there  
is a lot of data in the system, the map would keep shifting and  
rearranging, wouldn't it?



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