Hi, Sounds interesting. I don't quite understand exactly what you're proposing WRT crowdsourcing + google moderator, though. Could you give me a concrete example of the kind of thing you might crowdsource, and how?
Re. collaboration with mySociety: I don't work for mySociety so can't speak for them, but I do know that mySociety time is at a high premium at the moment; if you wanted more formal support / collaboration the best thing to do is wait until the next call for proposals. On the other hand if you went ahead and implemented this and could show its use then I am sure various people on this list would support it through data linkage and the rest, and possibly more. Thanks, Seb On 18 May 2010 17:48, Andrew Regan <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi everyone, > > I'm proposing a political crowdsourcing system - powered by the new > Google Moderator API (http://code.google.com/apis/moderator/) - that > has the following (possibly unique) aims and features: > > * To raise user expectations massively, in comparison to the "speak > your mind", "vote in our leadership poll", and blog comment-box > interaction models. > * Following directly from this: raise policymakers' expectations about > the *quality* and *usability* of crowdsourced content. > * All discussions can/should be seeded with existing political > content, rather than created out of a clear blue sky. > * All discussions to be integrated with, and matched against an > existing political knowledge base: the content from 2000+ top blogs, > feeds, and Wikis, from 2002 to date. > * The results of all discussions to feed back into the knowledge base. > * To be integrated with an existing, long-lasted, non-partisan system, > so users don't feel their contributions may be wasted or abused. > * Wherever possible, the results of all discussions should be freely, > publicly available, and/or queriable, so they can be used by other > tools. > > In short, the aims are to establish the crowdsourcing model, create a > really usable technical solution, feed the results back to the > political data/tech community, and improve policymaking: using what we > already know to produce fewer bad policies, and to make the process > more efficient. > > Is this something MySociety might like to get involved with? > > I'm proposing to implement this system as part of my existing Poblish > system, as I think we're in a great position to deliver all of the > above, and I'm hoping that if some of these goals inspire you guys, > you might be interested in suggesting, advising - here or elsewhere - > or perhaps even deciding to become more closely involved with the > work. > > I guess the main challenges are: > > * Usability (for users) and interoperability (for developers). > * Promotion and community development. > * Newness of the Google Moderator API, and the need for users to have > Google accounts. > > Background reading / what this is all about: > > * > http://blog.localdemocracy.org.uk/2010/01/13/poblish-when-crowdsourcing-new-policies-dont-waste-existing-content/ > * > http://blog.localdemocracy.org.uk/2010/01/26/poblish-better-blogging-and-better-technology-to-help-crowdsource-new-policies/ > * http://theconnectedrepublic.org/posts/467 (and comment) > > WDYT? > > > Andrew Regan > [email protected] / +44 7906 123390 > http://www.poblish.org/ > > _______________________________________________ > Mailing list [email protected] > Archive, settings, or unsubscribe: > https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/listinfo/developers-public > -- skype: seb.bacon mobile: 07790 939224 land: 020 8123 9473 _______________________________________________ Mailing list [email protected] Archive, settings, or unsubscribe: https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/listinfo/developers-public
