[Ag Meinungsfindungstool] Helping the Pirate Party to vanish

Sun Mar 10 16:39:32 EDT 2013

Hello everyone (Pablo from Partido de Internet, Spain; and pirate too.
Living in Köln now.)

I wonder how is the development of "meinungsfindungstools" right now.
Maybe some link? Is there a software/schematics comparison page in
some wiki or wikipedia?

And more specifically, is there software out there contemplating the
liberation of user data?

I am no programmer but understand the technologies (interested
electronics engineer).

I can say:

1. one approach I usually thought is having the software/plataform,
work always from the outside, being widgets to be inserted in normal
forums, or even links in emails. This will make it naturally to use
more "common" data forms and data meanings. And also it would be easy
that at some point the widget will send signals not only to the
"currently used tool" but also to some other, or a personal user data
box.

2. Reading you I came up with another idea. Build a
software/network/platform made of two type of components. One would
receive and keep all user data, and the other would use it but in
every new session it would have to re-upload, or refresh, the data
from the user data server. Like separating savings-banks from
investments-banks.

It would also be very nice for new programs to appear and hook up to
the network of already built user data. So innovation would thrive.

Another question. What semantic structures are people using for this
debate/decision/political-expression tools? Is there much new to be
"developed"? are there clearly discussed different approaches?

Cheers!

Pablo

2013/3/10 marc <marc at merkstduwas.de>:
> Hi Michael,
>
>
> You wrote:
>>
>> Marc and Alex,
>> Marc said:
>>>
>>> B) Why do you do not want to merge Outcast and CDS?
>>
>>
>> Thank you, I do.  We just have to finish clarifying how the merged
>> platform is going to obtain its users.  Again, either we (1) eliminate
>> network effects and enable the users to range freely across all
>> platforms, including competitors; or (2) rely on network effects to
>> force all users onto the single, merged platform.
>
>
> I am not talking about merging plattforms - there should plenty of them
> exist. The trick is to make them cooperate by sharing data and enhancing the
> processes one another.
>
>
>>> I am still towards (1) and I don't see any reason not to be. But I
>>> guess we have some basic misunderstanding here.
>>>
>>> So let's condense the goal:
>>>
>>> a) Let the users freely choose their favorite tooling,
>>> b) while the whole discourse is covered and
>>> c) without any loss of data.
>>>
>>> What is the point now?
>>
>>
>> I agree with (a), but why restrict the user's choice to (b) and (c)?
>> Suppose user U needs a toolset that covers only part of the discourse,
>> or part of the data.  Why not give U the same freedom as others to
>> choose according to personal need, or preference?  Who would have the
>> authority to say, "No, that choice is not permitted".
>
>
> That's not what I wanted to express. The user should not be restricted in
> any way, but can choose whatever toolset he wants, using whatever data he
> wants. Even if not any transition between tools might be reasonable in the
> context of the discourse.
>
> In my honest opinion (a) is already in place today. Everyone is free to use
> the toolset of his free choice. But one big thing missing now is the
> availability of the data. When it comes to changing the tools, the move of
> already entered data is mainly the problem. And to be honest, I don't want
> to enter the data again, just because I switched the tool, do you?
>
>
> Therefore (b) and (c) is more the responsibility of the tools to ensure that
> the user has all the freedom within the discourse and no restrictions at
> all!
> Therefore (b) and (c) are not a restriction to the user! It is quite the
> contrary, it allows for the freedom of choice!
>
>
> So let me put it in a slightly different way with keeping the explanation
> above in mind:
>
>
> a) Let the users freely choose their favorite tooling,
> b) within the context of a discourse
> c) and without any loss of data.
>
>
> Does this make sense to you?
>
>
>
> Cheers
> marc
>
>
>
> --
> Ag-meinungsfindungstool mailing list
> Ag-meinungsfindungstool at lists.piratenpartei.de
> https://service.piratenpartei.de/listinfo/ag-meinungsfindungstool

-- 
email: pablo2garcia at gmail.com
skype: pablo2all ; twitter: @pablo2garcia

----
(mi nuevo proyecto!!)

"PLAN CYBORG"   -  en RADIO POLITEIA
reuniones&radio sobre herramientas digitales político-sociales

Quieres asistir? difundir, ayudar, documentar? pasarme contactos?
estamos empezando!! (feb 2013)
Info&edit: http://titanpad.com/ovKJvX2M5p (propón y edita los Temas)
http://facebook.com/groups/PlanCyborg - @PlanCyborg

--
La wikipedia del 15m esta despegando! Nos vendrá bien una
documentación común!!!!!
http://wiki.15m.cc/wiki/Lista_de_políticos_y_familiares_en_consejos_de_administración

Noticias seleccionadas por la gente: http://meneame.net

Un partido político interesante: http://patidodeinternet.es promueve
la http://democracialiquida.es