[top-politics] Re: Definition of TOP - Systematization

[top-politics] The state of parlement

echarp — 2006-09-29 01:44:44+0200

On Tue, Sep 26, 2006 at 03:23:35AM -0000, Serge wrote:

We also would need to have a proposal at hand for what the system should be able of doing (Emmanuel do you have such a definition document?). Then again it’s not like it needs to be all slick and pretty since these documents are openstanding, it is more to provide a reasonable amount of information and direction for people to catch up on the idea and decide if they are interested and want to participate. Once the starting elements are there, it’s all about publicity. Talk on message boards forum, talk with political bloggers, email your address book about it, whatever you can think of to spread the word….

I don’t have much documents besides our discussions and parlement itself. Somehow, there is also rubyforge.

Basically, here are the already implemented features:

threaded forum
RSS feed for latest posts and most popular posts
login (optional password/email)
each post is also a forum
each post is also a mailing list
server replication (in real time by mail)
spam filtering (basic)
votes: -1, 0 or +1

Read more… / Lire plus…

avatars
personal display filter
posts can be positioned

Read more… / Lire plus…

In the future:

long posts shortened for display (tomorrow)
easy installation
electoral lists
PGP signatures
delegations
range votes
irc interaction
individual votes life span
web page updated in real time (chat)
voucher for anonymous pseudonym obtention

There are no roles, ranks, agendas, private settings, or obscured data. Everything is transparent, but for passwords (which are recorded as salted hashes and not replicated).

Poll results will be calculated according to a given electoral list. Which would thus act as a caucus of sorts. Anybody will be able to setup any number of electoral lists.

Anyone who has already posted to top-politics already has a parlement’s pseudo. It is the same as your mail’s name. Me for example, it’s “echarp”. Don’t hesitate to try it. You can, among other things, set up your avatar ;)

Come and have a talk on irc (you need to have java on your machine).

echarp – http://leparlement.org/irc

[top-politics] Re: The state of parlement

illegale — 2006-10-14 03:05:35+0200

This reminds me about compilating our recent intentions in order of getting back to them when the time comes.

ATB,
Gale

[top-politics] Re: The state of parlement

illegale — 2006-10-14 03:03:28+0200

[top-politics] Re: The state of parlement

echarp — 2006-10-11 15:17:02+0200

I am copying your implemented features and planned additions on the wiki so we may try to find a synthetic vision of the features a system would need.

Cool, definitely very cool!

Chiefly I’d like to add that this needs to be as easy as possible to install and implement so as to raise the chance of organizations adopting it.

Read more… / Lire plus…

There are currently two dependencies: ruby on rails and PostgreSQL. The only one bothering me is the DB. Anybody knows of a good ruby DB to remove that dependency? (this would do the same trick as derby in a J2EE project)

best regards,

Thanks, take care

echarp

[top-politics] Re: Definition of TOP - Systematization

illegale — 2006-09-27 22:29:58+0200

Serge wrote:

Hey Gale,

when you ask what we can do about that, I take “that” to mean “If yes, why don’t we start try and get more developpers involved to build on leparlement….”. The answer I would have is pretty straightforward.

For starters we need an accessible and compelling statement of intention (TOP definition).

OK. That is the job we are doing right now.

We also would need to have a proposal at hand for what the system should be able of doing (Emmanuel do you have such a definition document?).

Read more… / Lire plus…

Indeed. People will need definition (is that right word?) of future system in order of making people interested.

Then again it’s not like it needs to be all slick and pretty since these documents are openstanding, it is more to provide a reasonable amount of information and direction for people to catch up on the idea and decide if they are interested and want to participate. Once the starting elements are there, it’s all about publicity.

So, you think we do not get too loud before first two things are realised in satisfying manner? I do agree with this idea, as long as my previous attempts of getting people interested withouth any “catch” is actually far from satisfying experience. I believe we do indeed need to have some “product” first.

Talk on message boards forum, talk with political bloggers, email your address book about it, whatever you can think of to spread the word….

IMO it’s not exactly easy to do, but it’s really not that hard either, all it takes is to actually get the ball rolling.

OK.
ATB,
Gale

Regards,

Serge

[top-politics] Re: Definition of TOP - Systematization

echarp — 2006-09-26 10:35:57+0200

[top-politics] Re: Definition of TOP - Systematization

Serge — 2006-09-26 05:23:35+0200

Hey Gale,

when you ask what we can do about that, I take “that” to mean “If yes, why don’t we start try and get more developpers involved to build on leparlement….”. The answer I would have is pretty straightforward.

For starters we need an accessible and compelling statement of intention (TOP definition). We also would need to have a proposal at hand for what the system should be able of doing (Emmanuel do you have such a definition document?). Then again it’s not like it needs to be all slick and pretty since these documents are openstanding, it is more to provide a reasonable amount of information and direction for people to catch up on the idea and decide if they are interested and want to participate. Once the starting elements are there, it’s all about publicity. Talk on message boards forum, talk with political bloggers, email your address book about it, whatever you can think of to spread the word….

IMO it’s not exactly easy to do, but it’s really not that hard either, all it takes is to actually get the ball rolling.

Read more… / Lire plus…

Regards,

Serge

[top-politics] Re: Definition of TOP - Systematization

illegale — 2006-09-26 04:15:13+0200

Though, what can we do precisely about that?

ATB,
Gale