> I do wonder how you would construct a national network of local constituency exchanges on national issues.
What if local councils fulfilled this role? - they should be creating localised engagement spaces anyway and MPs could simply participate in these spaces, as they would be far better at aggregating community discussion anyway, rather than creating separate ones to deal with 'national issues'. Furthermore, I think councils should be facilitating and aggregating these spaces rather than just hosting them, i.e. connecting all the local community spaces together, whether they are being hosted on global systems like Facebook, or consist of comments on an article in a local paper, etc. Am I way off-beam with thinking this is a role for local councils? -- Chris Dymond Business Innovation Director TechnoPhobia Limited -----Original Message----- From: Steven Clift [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2009 8:39 PM To: mySociety public, general purpose discussion list Subject: Re: [mySociety:public] MPs 'talking, not hearing online' Sorting through the "private" inbox aside ... Elected officials tend to listen when they know it is their constituents/voters talking about them in a public way (or about issues that might influence how they vote). They tend to give far more credibility to people who use their real names and when the exchange is more civil or at least not a place where they have to defend themselves against personalized attacks. Just as E-Democracy.Org has found that neighbourhood forums engender specific local councillor interest more than council-wide spaces, I do wonder how you would construct a national network of local constituency exchanges on national issues. Ultimately, MPs will "listen" to citizens if they see citizens themselves listening to each other and engaging one another on the items in front of the MP at that time. They may not respond publicly, but you better believe they will monitor what is being said (particularly when you give them personalised notification tools). I doubt it would work without: A. Critical mass recruiting - at least 200 people in a constituency - people limited to only their constituency B. Real names policy C. Use an open source tool like GroupServer.Org that allows e-mail publishing/reply options D. Rules enforcement - instead of Forum Manager for each space, you'd need an online complaint system about jerks - Slashdot style rating might be useful, but solo dependence on them is a design for virtual egg throwing (very Internet, not very engagement oriented) E. Some way for the cream to rise to the top such that the best conversations can be viewed national and seeded in to other constituencies F. Some sort of discuss and poll option where highlighted monthly topics are seeded and participants polled to generate some aggregate statistics G. 2 million GBP or some very very inspired volunteers and less funding for coordination Steven Clift E-Democracy.Org _______________________________________________ Mailing list [email protected] Archive, settings, or unsubscribe: https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/listinfo/developers-public
