[MG] Cascading agreement, money, communities and other resources in votespace
Thomas von der Elbe
ThomasvonderElbe at gmx.de
Fri Jun 3 08:39:26 EDT 2011
Interesting! Yes I think it will work. But to show the number of active
communities in the vote-space is additional to the other 4 maps, right?
On Thu, 02 Jun 2011 19:44, Michael Allan wrote:
> Consider G/p/prz where the issue is the endowment of a prize.
> http://u.zelea.com/w/G/p/prz - No agreement is required for an
> endowment, only a sufficient sum of money. So (imagine) we replace
> all the red numbers with green ones and do whatever else it takes to
> enable the first time viewer to realize - in about 2 seconds - "Ah, I
> see! These people are pooling money."
Well, its both actually: money and agreement about the conditions of the
prize. Which makes it even more interesting. You can have as many plans
to do something as you have voters and for each plan you can see, if it
has enough resources to be actually executed. Once this point is
reached, no additional voters are needed.
> Now to communities: As we've discovered, the crucial resource in the
> beginning is not actually agreement or money, but rather the talk
> itself. Unless the conversation can extend over a sufficient number
> of communities - spread its wings and fly - it dies. So the content
> we need to show is the number of active communities over which each
> branch or tree of votespace has extended itself. We want the first
> time viewer to realize, "Ah, I see! These people are growing an
> extended conversation."
But here too: the content of the drafts plus the votes plus the number
of communities ... all together, right? Or do you picture it as seperate?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
Originally posted to the mailing list of the Metagovernment Project:
More information about the Votorola