That's a great convenience. However, my initial impression would be that you will really want to have people click an <okay> button to acknowledge that they *want you* to fill out a form for them, since, among other things, this now makes their donations publicly searchable, I believe. And just so that they know that you are doing it.
Paul Cz On Sat, Oct 3, 2020, 12:03 PM Yosem Companys <[email protected]> wrote: > Also, we are working on making the filling out and submittal of FEC forms > automatic, so people will do so without even realizing it upon signing up > for the app. > > On Sat, Oct 3, 2020 at 12:01 PM Yosem Companys <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Agreed. Unfortunately, FEC form is required for donating. For candidates >> (especially local ones), however, our app would streamline campaign finance >> because our app does all the paperwork automatically in the back end, so >> candidates would dramatically reduce the administrative burdens that often >> prevent them from being able to accept small donations. >> >> On Sat, Oct 3, 2020 at 11:50 AM Paul <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Thank you for the response, Yosem. >>> #2 (the *second *#2 đ) is especially interesting, though filling >>> out an FEC form feels to me like a fairly big obstacle to entry for users. >>> >>> Paul Cz. >>> >>> On Sat, Oct 3, 2020, 8:35 AM Yosem Companys <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> 1. Wevoyce doesn't return any hits on Google Play. Is the app only >>>> available from your site, at this time? >>>> >>>> The app is approved for the Apple and Android stores, but we have yet >>>> to open for downloads. The only way to download the app at this time is via >>>> special link. I will send you one separately. >>>> >>>> 2. When it talks about propositions (I think that was the word) does >>>> this mean only actual laws, ballot proposals, etc, or does it mean just >>>> something that someone advocates and is looking for support for? >>>> >>>> Think of a prop as a 435-character petition labeled by a hashtag. There >>>> are two types: >>>> >>>> - ?VoteFor props that are automatically tied to candidates (e.g., >>>> ?VoteForBiden or ?VoteForTrump). >>>> - Props focused on causes (e.g., ?SupportProChoice or >>>> ?SupportProLife). >>>> >>>> Users can interact with props as they would on social media: >>>> >>>> - Follow props. >>>> - Reply to props. >>>> - Like props. >>>> - Etc. >>>> >>>> 2. Do you have to put in $5 in order to use the app, or just if you >>>> want to contribute? >>>> >>>> No, just if you want to contribute. >>>> >>>> Participation is tiered based on real-world validation: >>>> >>>> - Using the app is free (i.e., there is no financial cost to using >>>> the app). Anyone may download the app, set up an account, and do the >>>> following: (1) read propositions, (2) read what people post, and (3) >>>> vote >>>> on props and what people say. >>>> - Anyone who registers to vote (and thus verifies they are a real >>>> person) may post. >>>> - Anyone who fills out the FEC form may donate. To ensure real >>>> people have a real impact, donating occurs via liking, as little as a >>>> penny. We call it, "Put your $ where your <3 is." Anytime you like >>>> something, you are donating to it, so you need to put at least $5 in >>>> your >>>> account to like things. >>>> >>>> One thing to note is that all the donations end up going to political >>>> candidates in at least three ways (and this is how we are campaign finance >>>> reform in an app): >>>> >>>> - You may donate to candidates directly via their VoteFor prop. >>>> - You may advocate candidates. If anyone likes you, any likes >>>> (i.e., real money) you receive go to the candidate(s) you advocate. >>>> - You may donate to a cause prop, and politicians who publicly >>>> commit to support these causes get a share of the donations. (You are >>>> told >>>> in advance who will get your donations.) >>>> >>>> Reading, voting, and donating can be private. Posting is always public. >>>> >>>> On Thu, Oct 1, 2020 at 12:55 PM Paul <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi Yosem, >>>>> I just started the signup process and I have three questions: >>>>> 1) do you have to put in $5 in order to use the app, or just if >>>>> you want to contribute? >>>>> 2) Wevoyce doesn't return any hits on Google Play. Is the app >>>>> only available from your site, at this time? >>>>> 3) when it talks about propositions (I think that was the word) >>>>> does this mean only actual laws, ballot proposals, etc, or does it mean >>>>> just something that someone advocates and is looking for support for? >>>>> >>>>> Thanks >>>>> Paul >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Oct 1, 2020, 12:18 PM Paul <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi Yosem, >>>>>> Thanks for letting us know about Wevoyce. I just skimmed it but >>>>>> the bits about "real people*," upvoting and, especially, micro donations, >>>>>> sound very interesting. >>>>>> Since my career has been in software testing, I will at least try >>>>>> it and let you know about anything I see. >>>>>> >>>>>> Paul Czyzewski >>>>>> >>>>>> * As long as you don't get swamped by real people who are, for >>>>>> example, Proud Boys or NRA members >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Thu, Oct 1, 2020, 12:04 PM Yosem Companys <[email protected]> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Excellent point, Nathaniel. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Some of us at Liberationtech have gotten together to try to fix >>>>>>> political discourse on social media and campaign finance by developing a >>>>>>> new mobile-based solution called Wevoyce. If you and others on the list >>>>>>> would like to check it out and give us feedback, please let me know. We >>>>>>> would really appreciate it. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>> Yosem >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Thu, Oct 1, 2020 at 11:42 AM Nathaniel Borenstein via >>>>>>> cpsr-activists list <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> This may sound naive, but here goes⌠>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Social media are just the latest way for people to communicate. >>>>>>>> All the other ways we have found to communicate have allowed us to >>>>>>>> express >>>>>>>> both the best and the worst of ourselves. Itâs often easier to figure >>>>>>>> out >>>>>>>> how to express the worst, but that doesnât mean we canât focus on the >>>>>>>> best. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> To my mind the right question is this: how can we use social media >>>>>>>> to create countervailing trends to the ones we have spent so much time >>>>>>>> bemoaning? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Unfortunately it is possible that the best answers to this question >>>>>>>> will require wrenching control of the social media landscape from big >>>>>>>> companies, but I suspect there is a fair amount we can do short of >>>>>>>> that. â >>>>>>>> Nathaniel >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Oct 1, 2020, at 12:33 PM, Doug Schuler via cpsr-activists list < >>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> One question is certainly why would one person use social media. >>>>>>>> The "CPSR" angle on it in my opinion would be something like this: >>>>>>>> Given >>>>>>>> the immense damage that social media as it's currently deployed and >>>>>>>> used >>>>>>>> wreaks on society, the public sphere, democracy, mental health, >>>>>>>> whatever >>>>>>>> you want to call it, what ought computer professionals do about it? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> It seems like other hams that are perpetrated in that it affects >>>>>>>> different people unequally. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> But I would also argue that, as with TV, individuals can "turn it >>>>>>>> off" but they can't turn off social media culture... >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 8:28 PM Paul via cpsr-activists list < >>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> rant >>>>>>>>>> I think that the crucial issue with facebook, twitter, etc is >>>>>>>>>> not just how manipulative they are, or are not. It's how Jeff long >>>>>>>>>> ago >>>>>>>>>> answered TV. I.E., don't use it at all. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Of course I realize that this side-steps the issue for the >>>>>>>>>> hundreds of millions of people who *do* use them. But, news aside, >>>>>>>>>> they >>>>>>>>>> are too much of a time sink and, IMO, the signal to noise ratio is >>>>>>>>>> unbelievably low.* Since I'm ranting, I'll throw in my Twitter >>>>>>>>>> analogy; >>>>>>>>>> it's like opening and reading two hundred fortune cookies because >>>>>>>>>> *one* of them may include something that you're glad you've >>>>>>>>>> read.** I'm not a very productive person, and I'm in no critical >>>>>>>>>> function >>>>>>>>>> (well, for a few more weeks, I will help some US Census enumerators >>>>>>>>>> who are >>>>>>>>>> having payroll issues) but, even when I'm unemployed, my time is >>>>>>>>>> *far* too >>>>>>>>>> valuable to spend on social media. >>>>>>>>>> One more opinion before I step off my high-horse. Getting >>>>>>>>>> news from Facebook or other social media is totally a losing >>>>>>>>>> proposition. >>>>>>>>>> Advising people on how to fix it, or how to confirm what they read, >>>>>>>>>> is a >>>>>>>>>> waste of time. The crucial part of getting news is to somehow find >>>>>>>>>> some >>>>>>>>>> trustworthy sources, and start from there. I don't agree with the >>>>>>>>>> spin on >>>>>>>>>> everything in the NY Times but I fully believe that, for reasons of >>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>> personal integrity of the journalists and also to protect their >>>>>>>>>> bottom >>>>>>>>>> line, they are never going to invent things that they print. >>>>>>>>>> /rant off >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> paul czyzewski >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> * if there was a way for me to just see my friends' family photos >>>>>>>>>> on facebook; ie, no news, and also no "vital" links passed on my >>>>>>>>>> well-meaning friends, I'd probably start looking at it again. But I >>>>>>>>>> think >>>>>>>>>> that there is (deliberately) no way to filter it that way. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> ** I once gave twitter what I thought was a fair test. There >>>>>>>>>> were tsunami warnings in Hawaii so I used some filter -- I don't >>>>>>>>>> know if >>>>>>>>>> it's still exists or not -- to watch a stream of tweets about that, >>>>>>>>>> real-time. Instead of the hoped-for "I see the wave entering the >>>>>>>>>> harbor; >>>>>>>>>> small boats are being overturned," I saw tweets on the order of "The >>>>>>>>>> news >>>>>>>>>> reported that, 30 minutes ago, the waves were twenty miles away." >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 7:46 PM Jeff Johnson via cpsr-activists >>>>>>>>>> list <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> This article argues that âThe Social Dilemmaâ movie is overblown: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20200928/11452045401/social-dilemma-manipulates-you-with-misinformation-as-it-tries-to-warn-you-manipulation-misinformation.shtml >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Jeff >>>>>>>>>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>>>>>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>>>>> To be removed from the list, send any message to: >>>>>>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> For all list information and functions, see: >>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/cpsr-activists >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>>>>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>>>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>>> To be removed from the list, send any message to: >>>>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> For all list information and functions, see: >>>>>>>>> http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/cpsr-activists >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> Douglas Schuler >>>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>> Twitter: @doug_schuler >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>>>> Public Sphere Project >>>>>>>> http://www.publicsphereproject.org/ >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Mailing list ~ Collective Intelligence for the Common Good >>>>>>>> * http://lists.scn.org/mailman/listinfo/ci >>>>>>>> <http://lists.scn.org/mailman/listinfo/ci>4cg-announce* >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Creating the World Citizen Parliament >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> http://interactions.acm.org/archive/view/may-june-2013/creating-the-world-citizen-parliament >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Liberating Voices! A Pattern Language for Communication Revolution >>>>>>>> (project) >>>>>>>> http://www.publicsphereproject.org/patterns/lv >>>>>>>> <http://www.publicsphereproject.org/patterns/> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Liberating Voices! A Pattern Language for Communication Revolution >>>>>>>> (book) >>>>>>>> http://mitpress.mit.edu/catalog/item/default.asp?ttype=2&tid=11601 >>>>>>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>>>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>> To be removed from the list, send any message to: >>>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> For all list information and functions, see: >>>>>>>> http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/cpsr-activists >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>>>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>> To be removed from the list, send any message to: >>>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> For all list information and functions, see: >>>>>>>> http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/cpsr-activists >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>
-- Liberationtech is public & archives are searchable from any major commercial search engine. Violations of list guidelines will get you moderated: https://lists.ghserv.net/mailman/listinfo/lt. Unsubscribe, change to digest mode, or change password by emailing [email protected].
