[EM] Voting reform statement - method of consensus drafting

[Michael Allan]

Jameson Quinn wrote:
> I appreciate the idea, and I think it has promise. Having just
> logged in and "patched" my statement to equal yours, though, I think
> that the process is still too complicated for a not-explicitly-
> -techie audience. ...

I agree, it's not beta ready and I wouldn't recommend using it.
Unless participation in the drafting effort began to flag at some
point.  Then it might be helpful.  It has a kind of "viral visibility"
that can be difficult to ignore, if not resist.

Let me know if Google Docs ever fails for you in that way, and we can
look at staging a recovery bid.

> ... For instance, even I (a relatively savvy guy; for instance, a
> regular user of git and github) can't figure out how to vote for
> "my" own version. And besides the generally-easier interface, google
> docs has wysiwyg, and comments.

Google Docs and MediaWiki have their pros and cons.  Often it comes
down to preference.  We can support free-range drafting across all
media in principle, including Google Docs.  But currently we cover
only MediaWiki.

I should mention that the voting system behind this cannot be compared
with those at issue in the reform statement.  They have different
purposes.  Voting is optional too, unless you happen to have lots of
participants.  Then it becomes indispensible.

You would vote for yourself here:
http://zelea.com:8080/v/w/Votespace?u=Jameson.quinn-GmailCom&p=G!p!vrs
But self voting is not allowed, because the purpose of these votes is
to express agreement.

-- 
Michael Allan

Toronto, +1 416-699-9528
http://zelea.com/


> So, I'm really sorry, I know that there's a lot of work there, and
> if it worked out, the idea of putting diffs into emails is a good
> one... but I'm going to have to say, I still consider the Google
> Docs version
> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1oyJLxI9dciXBbowM5mougnbGHzkL3Ue1QkD8nnMwWLg/edit?hl=en_US>
> as the official one. I've put your suggested changes in there.
> 
> We can also copy from the google docs "view history" to paste diffs here.
> For instance, the first of your suggested changes:
> 
> The study of voting systems has made significant progress over the last
> decade
> , and our understanding is even farther beyond what it was 20 years ago. One
> important place where that has happened is on the election methods mailing
> list.
> 
> 
> I understand that that will not fully work for those with text-only email,
> and does not provide a url with patch buttons. So I still think that when
> you smooth out the interface, your system will be better than Google Docs in
> important ways. But...
> 
> Sorry,
> Jameson