[MG] RG

Scott Raney metamerman at gmail.com
Mon Nov 21 09:45:21 EST 2016


On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 5:05 PM, max stalnaker <max.stalnaker at gmail.com> wrote:
> Pol.is is a web site in seattle that seems inactive.  It does refer to a
> development project for polis.  And none of this is necessarily real.  But
> if it is only a good story it may be more real than many things.

It's up and works, although they seem to have gone over to the "dark
side" (like NationBuilder/Whitehouse2): Their current focus seems to
be as an add-on for Slack. But it's not an EDD system anyway, it's
just a comment aggregation system. I.e. they might classify it as a
"deliberative democracy" system, but what it really is IMHO is just an
information gathering tool that politicians can use to poll the
"activerts" and maybe spare themselves from doing something *really*
stupid. Which is exactly what the NationBuilder project devolved into
(gotta make a buck somehow!) I actually came across pol.is again a few
weeks ago when the vTaiwan project was discussed. For example, I found
this to be a useful summary:
http://civichall.org/civicist/vtaiwan-democracy-frontier/

As with the other writeups of vTaiwan that one I think is dramatically
overselling the influence of this system and the demonstrations that
launched it (again, I was there at the time and didn't hear a thing
about it). If you browse around on vTaiwan.tw (hard to do if you don't
read Chinese, although you can generally find your way around using
the various google translate features) you'll find that even the most
heavily debated proposals only have on the order of a thousand
participants (out of 20+ million people). Can you say "Activerts"?
Anyone want to hazard a guess as to whether those activerts are any
more representative of the population in general than their elected
misrepresentatives?
  Regards,
    Scott



More information about the Start mailing list