Can our party pick your brain?

Thomas von der Elbe ThomasvonderElbe at
Fri Mar 18 04:45:18 EDT 2011

Hey Kevin, yes ofc, you can send my contact information to anyone you 
feel right about.


On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 19:41, Kevin Morais wrote:
> Hi Thomas work has begun in Registration of the Party name, people in 
> Ottawa know about it now, no big deal there.  I have a friend who I 
> believe lives in Germany as well His name is Jan, he is studying 
> physics, very intelligent man.  He has offered to help with the 
> Transparency Website and I think he is considering joining the Party, 
> may I send him your contact information, also the first draft for your 
> and others review I will post on a wiki for you to look at, the book 
> is writing itself Thomas.
> So may I send Jan your contact information?
> On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 5:32 AM, Thomas von der Elbe 
> <ThomasvonderElbe at <mailto:ThomasvonderElbe at>> wrote:
>     Kevin told me, he is going to officially register the party now.
>     Now I think, it would be good, to immidiatly start using our
>     tools. So the first members of the party get already a feeling,
>     what it is all about, even if the tools in general are still in
>     prototyp-phase. So even the party principles itself could be
>     subject to collaborative improvement right from the beginning and
>     open to every new member.
>     Next steps from my point of view would now be:
>     - Discussion-Medium: setup a discussion forum at the partys
>     homepage. This could be used for new members to exchange ideas
>     etc. But more importantly it could be used to discuss specific
>     differences in positions regarding party principles or party
>     policies. This type of forum would ideally allow to structure tons
>     of threads in a tree-structure (maybe every forum allows this, I
>     dont know). So every policy-issue could have its own thread and
>     every voter in this issue can have his own sub-thread and maybe
>     even sub-sub-threads for certain parts of his position. There can
>     be thousands of threads in the future.
>     - Drafting-Medium: I guess for the beginning we can use the
>     zelea-wiki for drafting. Should I setup a seperate area for the
>     party? Which then would have seperate sub-areas, like Canada,
>     Toronto, ...? Doesnt make so much sense, does it? Better to use
>     the whole wiki for the party and later filter out non-members, imo.
>     - Voting-Medium: use the zelea-vote-sever.
>     What are your thoughts?
>     Thomas
>     On Tue, 01 Mar 2011 2:53, Michael Allan wrote:
>>     Rohan Jayasekera wrote:
>>>     Michael, if I understand correctly, you're saying that there is no
>>>     need to choose right now between "party" and "no party" approaches,
>>>     and that Votorola and Transparency Party people should just work
>>>     together on getting a vote going in some riding on one or more
>>>     issues.  Is that correct?
>>     Thomas von der Elbe wrote:
>>>     Yes, I am more and more beginning to see it like this too. Party or
>>>     no party doesn't actually matter right now. What matters most is
>>>     that we together actually start to vote on a particular and well
>>>     chosen issue.
>>     Yes, since Thomas wants to.  But I can only speak for myself, not
>>     Votorola.  The #1 priority is that we continue working together (our
>>     small crew).  #2 is to give the tools a good workout, without which
>>     development stalls (see below).  So I think anyone who can move on 2
>>     without sacrificing 1 is going to lead the development forward.
>>     Rohan Jayasekera wrote:
>>>     Simplicity is key when introducing new things to people, so I
>>>     suggest that the initial issue(s) be ones that are already well
>>>     understood.  Also, since only a small percentage of people will be
>>>     (a) contactable by us and (b) willing to be "early adopters", we
>>>     will need a fairly large population to draw from in order to get
>>>     enough initial participants to bootstrap from.  I suspect that a
>>>     single riding will be too small.  Perhaps all ridings in one city
>>>     could be covered (Toronto seems to me the obvious choice), so that
>>>     in the early days when we don't have meaningful numbers in any one
>>>     riding we can still have meaningful totals for the city, and
>>>     publicizing those via city- level media will attract additional
>>>     participation in each riding.  (City-level media can include social
>>>     media: tweeters often assume that the reader is in the same city and
>>>     when that's untrue it's accepted and forgiven.) ...
>>     Technically we can handle any size/shape of jurisdiction, and just
>>     about any issue.  So that's all open.
>>     Just to be sure: the early adopters (b) won't have beta-quality tools
>>     to work with.  The tools are functional, but not always easy to use,
>>     full of features, beautiful to look at, etc.  We won't be able to fix
>>     that till the users confirm that all the essential pieces are in
>>     place.  (We need the walls, wiring and plumbing installed before we
>>     can hang the wallpaper, decorations, and so forth.)
>>     Thomas von der Elbe wrote:
>>>     One question remains open for me though: is it good enough, if the
>>>     vote-server runs under Mikes domain? People will want to have some
>>>     security that their votes and work will not be lost. I always
>>>     pictured some organizational structure which would garantee this. Is
>>>     there another way? If no, what priority does it have?
>>     If the only concern is data loss, then I think we have a solution
>>     already.  The backup is stored here:
>>     Someone just has to copy it to an independent site every so often, and
>>     we'll be fairly safe.
>>     Later, when we implement results verification, every verifier will
>>     have the ability to recreate a vote-server from scratch.  Meantime,
>>     the source code is here:
>>     Copy that too, and we're pretty well covered.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the Votorola mailing list