Dear
I think I have a great idea (yes, probably just like everyone posting here :-)
Wiki and its wikipedia/wikitionnary and other projects proved excellent to efficiently build free knowledge for everyone, by everyone cooperating together.
I propose today to adapt wiki software (a few add-ons could do it) to create a special wiki with the following main characteristics : - Allow to build cooperative propositions - Allow to vote on the propositions democratically
The fundamental difference it that this is therefore not to build knowlege but to build and adopt decision proposals. The philosophy remains the same : everyone with internet access can participate on a collaborative way, and safeguards in case of vandalism.
This would be a nice vision for what could become the future of democracy.
More on this page : http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikicracy
Hope for your support or constructive criticism
Sincerely,
Vincent Mandrilly
_________________________________________________________________ MSN Messenger : discutez en direct avec vos amis ! http://www.msn.fr/msger/default.asp
Hoi, You describe the means and the mechanism but when a decision is made .. then what ??? If it is not clear what the consequences are of decisions. There is no point to making decision as there is no implied follow up; this is where the proposal ends. Thanks, GerardM
On 8/10/07, Vincent Mandrilly vmandrilly@hotmail.com wrote:
Dear
I think I have a great idea (yes, probably just like everyone posting here :-)
Wiki and its wikipedia/wikitionnary and other projects proved excellent to efficiently build free knowledge for everyone, by everyone cooperating together.
I propose today to adapt wiki software (a few add-ons could do it) to create a special wiki with the following main characteristics :
- Allow to build cooperative propositions
- Allow to vote on the propositions democratically
The fundamental difference it that this is therefore not to build knowlege but to build and adopt decision proposals. The philosophy remains the same : everyone with internet access can participate on a collaborative way, and safeguards in case of vandalism.
This would be a nice vision for what could become the future of democracy.
More on this page : http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikicracy
Hope for your support or constructive criticism
Sincerely,
Vincent Mandrilly
MSN Messenger : discutez en direct avec vos amis ! http://www.msn.fr/msger/default.asp
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
I propose today to adapt wiki software (a few add-ons could do it) to create a special wiki with the following main characteristics :
- Allow to build cooperative propositions
- Allow to vote on the propositions democratically
I'm not sure those two characteristics work well together. Democracy can only decide between a finite number of discrete choices. A co-operative proposition building process is likely to end up with a large number of propositions without definite borders between them. Wikis are good for building consensus, not for managing a democracy.
That aside, the main problem is that you don't say what you intend this site to make decisions about. It sounds like your are just proposing an online debating society, which really isn't something the Wikimedia Foundation would have anything to do with. By all means create your own site along those lines, but it will never be a Wikimedia project.
My thoughts exactly. You are welcome to download and use MediaWiki, the software Wikipedia uses, and run your website using it, however. See mediawiki.org/wil/Download Regards,
On 8/10/07, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
I propose today to adapt wiki software (a few add-ons could do it) to
create
a special wiki with the following main characteristics :
- Allow to build cooperative propositions
- Allow to vote on the propositions democratically
I'm not sure those two characteristics work well together. Democracy can only decide between a finite number of discrete choices. A co-operative proposition building process is likely to end up with a large number of propositions without definite borders between them. Wikis are good for building consensus, not for managing a democracy.
That aside, the main problem is that you don't say what you intend this site to make decisions about. It sounds like your are just proposing an online debating society, which really isn't something the Wikimedia Foundation would have anything to do with. By all means create your own site along those lines, but it will never be a Wikimedia project.
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Ahem... mediawiki.org/wiki/Download :)
On 8/10/07, Gary Kirk gary.kirk@gmail.com wrote:
My thoughts exactly. You are welcome to download and use MediaWiki, the software Wikipedia uses, and run your website using it, however. See mediawiki.org/wil/Download Regards,
On 8/10/07, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
I propose today to adapt wiki software (a few add-ons could do it) to
create
a special wiki with the following main characteristics :
- Allow to build cooperative propositions
- Allow to vote on the propositions democratically
I'm not sure those two characteristics work well together. Democracy can only decide between a finite number of discrete choices. A co-operative proposition building process is likely to end up with a large number of propositions without definite borders between them. Wikis are good for building consensus, not for managing a democracy.
That aside, the main problem is that you don't say what you intend this site to make decisions about. It sounds like your are just proposing an online debating society, which really isn't something the Wikimedia Foundation would have anything to do with. By all means create your own site along those lines, but it will never be a Wikimedia project.
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
-- Gary Kirk
When Jimmy was talking something about politics.wikia, I was thinking that it was a platform for something like this idea. And I was disappointed when I realized that it is just a one more Wikipedia fork one more specific field (political parties).
I think that this is a good idea (of course, not for WM) if it has connections with a "real world". MediaWiki (wiki in general, but MediaWiki especially) is a good platform for articulating political thoughts of communities (from small to huge; I am sure that with some software improvements countries/states with around 20 millions of inhabitants may work together on one MediaWiki).
So, my suggestions are:
- Buy domain wikicracy.org (or something which you like); it is something like $10/year; try with godaddy.com, for example. - Ask Wikia (http://www.wikia.com/) for hosting. - Build a theoretical model. - Find real communities (for example, some municipalities) which are willing to switch to MW in their decision-making process.
When you make some initial steps (everything is quite easy except to find some communities, so, let's say, when you have active contacts with at leas one community which is willing to switch to MW) -- I am willing to join you and to help. (I have a lot of ideas related to this issue.)
On 8/10/07, Gary Kirk gary.kirk@gmail.com wrote:
Ahem... mediawiki.org/wiki/Download :)
On 8/10/07, Gary Kirk gary.kirk@gmail.com wrote:
My thoughts exactly. You are welcome to download and use MediaWiki, the software Wikipedia uses, and run your website using it, however. See mediawiki.org/wil/Download Regards,
On 8/10/07, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
I propose today to adapt wiki software (a few add-ons could do it) to
create
a special wiki with the following main characteristics :
- Allow to build cooperative propositions
- Allow to vote on the propositions democratically
I'm not sure those two characteristics work well together. Democracy can only decide between a finite number of discrete choices. A co-operative proposition building process is likely to end up with a large number of propositions without definite borders between them. Wikis are good for building consensus, not for managing a democracy.
That aside, the main problem is that you don't say what you intend this site to make decisions about. It sounds like your are just proposing an online debating society, which really isn't something the Wikimedia Foundation would have anything to do with. By all means create your own site along those lines, but it will never be a Wikimedia project.
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
-- Gary Kirk
-- Gary Kirk
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Thomas Dalton wrote:
I propose today to adapt wiki software (a few add-ons could do it) to create a special wiki with the following main characteristics :
- Allow to build cooperative propositions
- Allow to vote on the propositions democratically
I'm not sure those two characteristics work well together. Democracy can only decide between a finite number of discrete choices. A co-operative proposition building process is likely to end up with a large number of propositions without definite borders between them. Wikis are good for building consensus, not for managing a democracy.
That's a strange view of democracy. I see a collaborative process as being more democratic than a vote-based system.
Ec
That's a strange view of democracy. I see a collaborative process as being more democratic than a vote-based system.
Well, by the strictest definition, democracy is rulership by the people, in which case you are absolutely right. The common definition, however, is rulership by the majority, which is what I was talking about.
Thomas Dalton wrote:
That's a strange view of democracy. I see a collaborative process as being more democratic than a vote-based system.
Well, by the strictest definition, democracy is rulership by the people, in which case you are absolutely right. The common definition, however, is rulership by the majority, which is what I was talking about.
The problem is that there are significant numbers of people in both camps. The obscure word "psephocracy" is available to describe ruling by ballots.
Ec
I like 'chadocracy', for some people named Chad. SJ
On Fri, 10 Aug 2007, Ray Saintonge wrote:
Thomas Dalton wrote:
That's a strange view of democracy. I see a collaborative process as being more democratic than a vote-based system.
Well, by the strictest definition, democracy is rulership by the people, in which case you are absolutely right. The common definition, however, is rulership by the majority, which is what I was talking about.
The problem is that there are significant numbers of people in both camps. The obscure word "psephocracy" is available to describe ruling by ballots.
Ec
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org