[pp.int.general] Another voting tool: loomio

[carlo von lynX]

On Sun, Feb 24, 2013 at 10:46:46PM +0100, Dario wrote:
> It's a nice tool but I think it fails on the same spot as LQFB: debate. I
> have some ideas stated here [0] but they are too general:
> https://github.com/imdario/lyd/wiki/Analysis

i find your analysis interesting and would like to see if it
works out to integrate something like that into liquid feedback.

the main problem of all alternatives to liquid feedback is that,
if they implement liquid democracy all, they still do not free the
participant from having to monitor new issues to make sure they
don't miss anything they care about. LF has the area concept
which lets you not care about 95% of party politics and just
focus on your area of competence. that may seem obvious, but it
is IMHO crucial.

your approach at least has half a solution by sending people a
"flow creation notice." still i'm afraid if used on a scale of
pirate party lqfb's it would get annoying without the area
splitting.

instead i have been recently scandalously considering the idea
of extending the suggestion mechanism of LQFB into a fully
blown threaded and weighted forum system.. basically a reddit
built into LF - simply by distinguishing a conversational item
from an actual amendment request to the proposal. the way LF
doesn't have a builtin conversation tool fails as people never
know there is a conversation there, so they never click on the
link. so having it integrated and profiting from the like/dislike
valutations already makes it de facto like built-in reddit. all
it needs is a chronological representation and a nice graphical
presentation of important and unimportant contributions.

even the forking and merging of flows can all make sense in
a setting like that, and it would all be integrated in a single
tool. after all i don't see a point in rewriting all the other
parts of the code of LF which are just fine.

> Also, I don't have enough time to lead technically this project but maybe I
> can help to put together a group to create (from the ground or based on
> other) a better software. I think I'm not alone from what I read in other
> threads. Who is up too for this idea?

just gave you my $0.02 for that :)

but it's time for me to shut up and be quiet for the next half
year.. too much activity on the same mailing list is never healthy   ;)