Can our party pick your brain?

Kevin Morais motherearthisalive at
Sat Mar 19 22:27:41 EDT 2011

Thank you Thomas :)  I will be careful with your information.  Would you
like a peek at the book?  Attached is the Original 12 and 12 pdf used by
most 12 Step Groups.  I am going through the book and replacing the Word God
with Peace and Alcohol with Freedom, I am having to rewrite chapters and it
is coming along, spent many hours going to be a bit longer.  It is writing
it self, it is creepy but a good creepy.  Oh Jan my friend in Germany I
believe it is Germany, offered to help with Transparency's Flash Website.
Here is his Youtube Channel He study's Physics and is a very good man.  Here
is his Youtube Channel

Peace Thomas and I will send you first draft for your review, this is the
core of the Party and Thomas it is writing it self.


On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 4:45 AM, Thomas von der Elbe <
ThomasvonderElbe at> wrote:

>  Hey Kevin, yes ofc, you can send my contact information to anyone you
> feel right about.
> Thomas
> 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> 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: <>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: The 12-Steps and 12 traditions.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 564780 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <>

More information about the Votorola mailing list