RFC Integrity Enforcement

[Carl Ballard Swanson (banzai9)]

I posted this as comment but I would like to see greater readership.

I am anxious to see how charettes and open source will stay open. I suspect that the degree we make these projects enforce integrity of belief/membership/contribution will be the degree we are successful. To give a better idea of what I am saying - lots of people practice "democratic" "consensus" then the real decisions are made in "parking lot" conversations. I don't think we want to forbid parking lot conversations so we are left with how to make them accessible equally.



After defeating the "parking lot" monster we will still have to confront vast differences in the amount of participation/time devoted by members. The trip up there with different levels of activity is that active members garner more support - have more influence - are Trong believers - talk more. That is not bad but you will notice overtime that policy is being charted by aggressive optimists instead of cautious intuitive types.

As you may know I believe in the blending of viewpoints and voices, even and especially the voices that are not heard often or loudly. A great solution to this is the inclusion of a social component, the problem with bringing social stuff into the mix is that is brings the rest of the cultural baggage and prejudice.



Boil it down to - you want different results use different inputs.

[cRitter]

I like to imagine the Web 2.0 as a series of canals that interconnect with one another and direct the flow of traffic back to the source.

In other words, if you use Digg and MeetUp as their own sites and not attempt to compete with their services (directly or by adding your own custom tools) then everyone gets a share of the traffic.

[Carl Ballard Swanson (banzai9)]

Good inputs: Digg and MeetUp

They have an added bonus of perceptual independence from our MondoGlobo teaparty. If they were added somehow as recommended or widely adopted services by the MondoGlobo would they also add to our/MondoGlobo credibility?

[cRitter]

I see those inputs as being the voting box, picket lines, and messages to the editor.

The voting box fails to affect the most broad and corrupted issues, while the picket lines messages to the editor produce no accountability.

Different inputs include Digg, which ranks popular stories based on user votes, and MeetUp, which empowers dissonant organizations to wield the power of the masses.

The results of a government built upon the Democratic principles of Open Source would look much different than the world we currently inhabit.