The WPE software

From Worldparliament

Jump to: navigation, search

The following proposals have received wide support in the World Parliament voting system. Many of these proposals are also followed by informative responses from other members which are not reproduced here, but can be found under 'Program' ; 'The Global Democracy Project' at the original website; www.tgde.org. Accoding to the decision taken 05 July 2005, there is a "list of suggested improvements" to the software at the bottom of the page.


Contents

Delegated voting

created by Tenbergen (1414) - 10 Feb 2005, 13:42

We support the delegated voting system which was recently established on this website.


Ranking

created by Tenbergen (1434) - 10 Feb 2005, 13:45

We support the new ranking feature on this website.


Global governance and institutions as a category

created by Pierre McDuff (107) - 13 Mar 2005, 02:32

Global governance and global institutions should be added as a voting category so as to allow discussion on the roles of those institutions, their possibilities of reform and the type of relations that they should have with the national states and the general assembly.

Comments status on Votes Pages

created by alternz (1033) - 21 May 2005, 01:45

Votes pages, as well as the useful little tick that tells us whether we have voted on each vote, should also have some way of indicating when there is a comment we have not read.


New category of Votes

created by alternz (1033) - 21 May 2005, 01:59

The World Parliament should institute a new category of vote: "Permanent/Open Vote".

Permanent/ Open votes would always be current so that new members could always vote on them immediately. They would allow members to change their votes if their views change.


Information and warning about time out

created by alternz (1033) - 21 May 2005, 02:23

Notice about the length of the period before login times out should be clearly displayed and a warning reminder given for "create vote" and "comment".


Easier voting

created by Mikael (978) - 07 Jun 2005, 21:01

I would like to have a possibilty to go directly to "my next unvoted current/future vote" from each vote, so I do not have to click so many times to go between the different vote.



Further info on new votes.

created by swotty (997) - 14 Jun 2005, 08:52

The World Parliament Experiment requests that, where possible, new votes provide links to further information.


Make it possible to edit your votes

created by Mikael (978) - 14 Jun 2005, 09:59

It is currently impossible for the author of a vote to edit it once it is proposed. Sometimes wrong formulations and spelling errors needs to be corrected, links needs to be entered etc. On the other hand it shoud not be possible to change the core meaning and purpose of a vote, after that people already have voted, thus making it possible to cheat. I therefore suggest that it should be possible for the author of a vote to edit it within i.e. one week after its initial proposal and that people in this period not would be asked to vote, but only to comment it and suggest improvements. With a more advanced system, it might be of help if the improvement suggestions also could be rated upon. This proposal somehow overlaps and replaces my previous proposal about a "refinement stage".

This proposal has been adressed by introducing the Draft Proposals area.

Make votes updateable

created by Mikael (978) - 14 Jun 2005, 10:04

Make it possible to update your votes until the voting deadline. The reasons for this are: 1. To prevent errors because people vote wrongly by mistake. 2. To prevent pressure from other people who "looks over your shoulder" when you vote. If i.e. your boss or partner presures you to vote in one direction while looking over your shoulder while you vote, you can later modify the vote by changing it, when they do not look over your shoulder. This diminishes the risk for vote selling and corruption. 3. You can have the right to change your mind about an issue, after that you have been convinced by better arguments.

Recent changes

created by Mikael (1030) - 17 Jun 2005, 05:13

I would like to have a personal page on the site, where I can see what has happened since my last log-in, i.e. new votes, comments etc, so that I easier can find what´s new.

General Assembly

created by atif (522) - 21 Jun 2005, 19:35

I would also like to see the list of General Assembly members sorted by their Country of Nationality, by their Membership Joining Date, etc.


List of Improvements

created by atif (522) - 05 Jul 2005, 01:24

I would like to see a separate link at the World Parliament site listing all those suggestions made recently by the General Assembly members to improve this platform. The list must also include each suggestions status e.g. Have they been addressed, when will they will addressed, if they are not addressed then what is the reason for that.

This proposal has been addresed on this page

Creation of a WPE discussion forum

created by Grimace (235) - 06 Jul 2005, 16:48

I petition that a general forum for WPE discussion be established as quickly as possible. I raise this petition in the hope that it will provoke discussion on the best means of acheiving this goal, and provoke action towards achieving it. I am frustrated that no means exists for general discussion of issues relating to WPE and otherwise by WPE members.

I foresee benefits in terms of encouraging site activity and interaction amongst assembly members, and in terms of encouraging more rapid development of the aims of the WPE.

This proposal has been adressed at the http://www.tgde.org/forum/ site.

Reintroduce delegated voting, with no delegation as default option.

created by Mikael (978) - 20 Jul 2005, 12:23

The recently made decision to abolish the delegated voting system shows clearly the danger using random delegation as default option.

The vote was made during holiday times, when direct participation was low. I think the actual votes where 4 against, and 2 for. I voted for delegated voting, and I am quite confident that at least 3 people have me as personal delegate. If the guys who voted against the delegated voting had no personal delegations, the for side would have won without the random delegation. One of the main purposes with the delegated voting is to prevent exactly this kind of situations, where a minority can force their opinion on a majority just because the participation is low. Therefore I propose that we reintroduce delegated voting, with no delegation as basic setting. In the long run, we have to make a better presentation of the delegated voting system, in order to make it more comprehensive and useable.


we have a discussion forum!

created by Tenbergen (1434) - 24 Jul 2005, 11:22

Dear WPE members,

Grimace has created a discussion forum for this project on http://wpe.proboards49.com. I think that this is a great initiative and we should should use it and create a link on this page. If you support that, please vote yes.


--------
I am confused by the fact that there is also a discussion forum at http://www.tgde.org/forum/
and the wiki here and at http://www.tgde.org/cvotes.phtml (when clicking under category subject). How do these spaces work together?
sorry- Janos 16:28, 10 March 2007 (IST)

Implementing decisions

created by Tenbergen (1434) - 24 Jul 2005, 11:33

Dear WPE members,

sometimes it is not so easy to implement WPE decisions, that applies especially if technical changes are required. In the past we had several decisions about delegated voting, some in favor, some against, the latest against. Here is how we dealt with these decisions in the past and how we plan to deal with them in the future:

- if there is a decision on a technical change, we put in on a technical wishlist and try to implement it as soon as we have the volunteers who can implement it or the money to pay the implementation - in the meantime we keep the old system unless the person who initiated the proposal objects and wants an earlier change

If you think this procedure is ok, please vote yes, if not, please vote no (and please propose an alternative procedure).

This proposal has been taken care of on this page

Wishlist

created by swotty (997) - 28 Jul 2005, 11:51

The WPE votes that the Speaker Fabian Kyrieleis and Executive Director Rasmus Tenbergen compose a copy of the ?Technical Wishlist? for display on the WPE Forum, being aware that the list may be edited there by the author if changes are required. Any changes to the wishlist may then be discussed and voted on.

It is proposed that when a means becomes available to achieve an item on the Wishlist, the Speaker is notified and creates a vote to ensure the WPE members are still in accordance with the change before it proceeds.

So far I am aware of the following changes pending and would ask the members to assist in constructing this list by reminding us of any other changes we may need to add.

1. The World Parliament should institute a new category of vote: "Permanent/Open Vote". Permanent/ Open votes would always be current so that new members could always vote on them immediately. They would allow members to change their votes if their views change.

2. That delegated voting become optional for the individual.

3. That a longer period is allowed before a time-out occurs.

4. That time remaining before "time-out" be displayed.

5. That when creating votes, a warning be displayed that comments should be prepared in another application and pasted to avoid being lost.

6. That a "next vote" button be installed to allow speedier navigation.

Please note that constructing this list on the forum will allow further discussion and these subjects should not be considered finalised until someone proposes the method of implementation to the speaker and a final vote is acheived.

I know we have a lot of techno-savvy members just itching to have a go at the code, but we are still in an early stage of "development as a democracy", and need to make sure the changes are ones we all want.

New Topic for Wishlist. (3)

created by swotty (997) - 30 Jul 2005, 12:01

That votes collected in the "Program" section be "archived" after 4 months to allow site navigation to move more quickly.

New Topic for Wishlist. (4)

created by swotty (997) - 30 Jul 2005, 12:41

That a new category of votes be formed representing "Primary Production".

This has been taken care of on this wiki

Wishlist: Week-by-week archive of voting results

created by Grimace (235) - 16 Aug 2005, 18:41

I propose that the following be added to the wishlist:

Add a section to the website entitled "Vote Archive," which records proposals chronologically, on a week-by-week basis, starting with the most recent. The success or failure of each proposal should at minimum be displayed with each archived proposal's title, which should link to that proposal's page.

Paged navigation should at minimum allow the user to navigate to the next week / previous week.


Home Page Date

created by alternz (1033) - 18 Aug 2005, 02:52

That any message on the "Home" page indicate when it was last updated and in particular that any announcement of something new be dated.


Links in the website

created by swotty (997) - 10 Oct 2005, 07:43

In the interest of developing a workable model for changes to the website I ask all members to consider the following proposal;

With the introduction of "permanent proposals" on the website (with ongoing voting) there is an opportunity for members to sumbit reference material in the form of weblinks attached to each permanent proposal. These websites could also be ranked by members to recommend them or show disapproval (?).

A links page will also be added to the website to build awareness of other global democracy / justice related websites.

This proposal has partly been taken care of on the Links page. Ther is though still no opportunity to rank these links.

Model #2: changes to the website

created by swotty (997) - 26 Sep 2005, 13:33

This model is the second put forward in a bid to improve the website. It is requested that members read the vote carefully and contribute with any problems they may see in it, voting "no" unless they are completely happy with the model being implemented.

The WPE approves the following model for site changes. New voting procedure;

1. New proposals will enter into a "draft proposals" area. Done, see Draft Proposals

2. The author of the proposal will indicate their intention for the length of voting duration. This duration will be displayed. Done, see Draft Proposals

3. Duration may be set at permanent, or be given a date for voting to end.

4. All proposals in the draft section may be edited by the author for 1 week or until ratified by members. Members may provide the author with comments at this stage. ne, see Draft Proposals

5. Non-permanent proposals will progress to the voting section after 1 week. Drafts for permanent proposals will be ratified when reaching a "significant member satisfaction point" of 75% (two thirds majority) over a minumum of one week. If, after two weeks the draft still has not reached 75% approval, it will be automatically deleted. An author may delete their own draft proposal at any time.

6. Permanent proposals must retain a member approval of 75% to remain in the permanent voting section. Proposals losing approval will revert to the "draft" section automatically for one week to allow the author to consider revising the text and allow other members to further discuss the proposal. The author may also set a different "end-date" for voting if desired. Authors of proposals will receive an email to advise them of the re-drafting of their proposal.

7. Members may alter their votes for any proposal at any stage.

8. Proposals being voted on will be ranked according to their level of approval.

9. Non-permanent votes achieving 75% member approval at closure will be archived with date, title and approval rating.

10. Authors of a new proposal will be requested to provide weblinks to "further information" if possible.

Other aspects of the website to be reviewed;

11. Delegated voting will be re-introduced with "no-delegation" as the default. Members will be required to delegate their own absentee votes to another member, set their delegation at "random" or forfeit their vote when they are not actively voting. This change to the software will be made very clear to new members.

12. Members logging in will chose to have 1, 2 or 3 hours before a time-out occurs.

13. When creating votes, a warning will be displayed that comments should be prepared in another application and pasted to avoid being lost.

14. A "next vote" button will be installed to allow speedier navigation.

15. "Proposals" will no longer be referred to as "votes" to avoid confusion.

16. A permanent link will be provided to the informal discussion forum (wpe.proboards49.com), with the caution that discussion of specific drafts should be submitted on the WPE main site.

17. Discussions will automatically appear below proposals without further clicking.

18. A page will be provided for members to submit weblinks. These links should be sent to the executive director for addition until such time as he relinquishes this role.

Members are requested to provide comments and suggestions here or join/initiate a less formal discussion of this model in the forum (wpe.proboards49.com). Further models will be created unless there is a very high approval vote and there are no further suggestions.

A testing function before a new vote is published

created by Mikael (1030) - 15 Mar 2006, 20:16

Before a new vote is published, a person responsible for this function should check if this vote is proposed before, so we do not have double votes on the same issues. If the vote is very similar, but not exactly the same as a previous decision, he should mention this in the discussion area.

I have a problem to remeber all previous votes when I want to propose a new one.


Faster server

created by jasper (62) - 16 May 2006, 20:58

I propose to switch to a faster server than the current one.

The WPE website is extremely slow compared to other sites. Research has shown, that web-surfers are willing to spend a lot of time on a website that interests them, but their tolerance to loading times is very very low. In other words, a slow website is a huge entry barrier. (and I am one of those sometimes getting impatient.)

Can anyone estimate how much it would cost to switch to a faster server? Then we could start finding ways of getting the money for it. I'm quite sure at least some people would be willing to donate.

Free software

created by teamdummy (46) - 15 Apr 2006, 13:09

The GDE should be based on free software.

I heard is is supposed to be free already, I just wonder where we can find the source code? Jan Mikael

Manageable Numbers of Votes

created by alternz (1033) - 25 May 2006, 10:40

we need to figure out how to use the website so that there are a manageable number of initiatives or motions for people to consider at any one time as the participation builds.


Technical Development Proposals

created by Tenbergen (1434) - 27 May 2006, 09:46

Technical Development Proposals

1. The speed of the website is the No.1 priority. The administration should try to make sure that we have a fast site as soon as possible. 2. A permanent wishlist should be created in the forum, so that members can propose improvements they want to see implemented. These proposals will be implemented if there is a valid decision in favor on the website and the resources to implement them are available. 3. In addition to obvious minor improvements (do an operation with one click instead of two if possible etc.), there should be a discussion on major aspects (permanent votes, delegated voting applications, wiki areas etc.) that could lead to major technical changes.


Notification of New Comments

created by alternz (1033) - 12 Oct 2006, 12:24

Members of the World Parliament should be able to "watch" the discussion on a proposal so that an email is sent to them when there is a new posting as it is in the World-Democracy Forum.


Clering the WPE and world-democracy forum � once again

created by Milan Malej (100) - 19 Dec 2006, 11:27

Clering the WPE and world-democracy forum � once again


This proposal is written as independent, but also as an answer to Alternz to theme of using the world-democracy forum, linked also to WPE website. The forum's original address is http://www.world-democracy.org, but if we come there from this website, it gets the address http://www.tgde.org/forum/. So much that we know exactly about what we are talking�


Dear Alternz

What you are writing about the forum usage, seems to me in this moment a nonsense. I excuse you that I must say that, and I hope that my answer will work in sense of our good relation. Once you have already answered me indirectly, when I critisized linking of "spams" to that forum and talked about automatic generated members. You thought that I am talking about WPE voting proposals and wrote "� we have 596 members�" You thought � members of WPE General Assembly. Instead of proposal that the software would be written really "user friendly", you actually propose that the "friendly users" should support the laziness of the programmers, administrators and moderators.

The members of world-democracy forum are mostly fictive members. The member names are generated by some aggressive comercial companies where they link their website at the time of "registration". Most of these linked websited have kitu CRM iere or drug-industry content. Many of them are also very dangerous to get a computer virus. These "spams" are passive and wait that you open the link. But they accesss almost entire member list, and finding someone who discusses seriously, is almost impossible. There are in this moment more than one tousand of all member in member list, but I estimate maybe 5% are real and interested in the aim of the forum. At the beginning I thought also that they are only members who only observe what is happening, but after anylysing their websites (and also getting virus from them) it is clear that they register to the forum only because of possibility of website linking. You can compare this situation simply with this WPE-forum: where no link is possible, no commercials are on.

The other "spams" are generated as messages, mostly by seemingly real members. They appear as "answers" to serious proposals and to the other spams. The links to the problematic websites are hidden inside of the messages. With "answering" to old proposals they mix unnecessarily their time schedule and hide serious contents. Therefore the use of this forum is practically impossible. Dear Alternz, the reader can simply not ignore these spams, as you propose. If you think that people will participate to this forum, you are wrong. I put there three serious articles, but the result is very poor�

If we want to have serious debate there about things the forum is indended for, it have to be cleared of all this shit. In this sense I appeal here once again to the administration of WPE and world-democracy website, but especially to the speaker Mr. Kyrieleis, to the executive director Mr. Tenbergen and to all moderators to work and find solutions in direction of clearing the forum and keeping it in the future acceptable for its purpose.


My proposal is the following:

1.) Deleting the possibility of linking a website to a member name at the time of registration. If you look (also from WPE) known members, you will see that practicly no one from them is using this option and that it is entirely unnecessary. If a member really want to advice a website, he can do it in his participied message.

2.) Administration control of incomming mails. If they include commercial contents or have linked such websites, the administrator or moderators should delete them without any warning. In case of doubt they should warn the author to explain or correct the mail.

3.) I have already proposed this directly on the forum, and Huggsy also supported me. But the proposal had no effect and also no answer came back. The problem is again that very few people read the forum. I think this is a little unserious. From my side, if these conditions continue without change or explanation, I will find another way to express my proposals and ideas.


Abstract of the proposal

Answering to whom: Alternz

Answering to subject: Use the Forum

Addressing the public: World Parliament Experiment � General Assembly Members of Coalition for World Parliament and World Democracy

Proposals: Clearing the world-democracy forum and keeping it clear

Explanations: Fictive members registrations Mixing forum by spams


website update

created by Tenbergen (1434) - 31 Jan 2007, 11:43

We should try to get a website update before the big World Parliament Day in Norway takes place (February 22th) to make it more interesting for participants to join our project. People are invited to contribute resources: ideas, money(?), other material. Please vote yes if you like the plan and propose the aspects you consider to be important in separate votes.


Permanent/Open Vote

created by alternz (1033) - 06 Feb 2007, 09:01

Permanent/Open Vote

created by alternz (934) - 21 May 2005, 01:59 amended 6 Feb 2007

The World Parliament should institute a new category of vote: "Permanent/Open Vote".

Permanent/ Open votes would always be current so that new members could always vote on them immediately.


Applications of decided changes to the texts on this website

created by Mikael (1245) - 28 Feb 2007, 12:17

There should be a text on the "create vote" website recommending participants to first enter their votes in the Primary Production area for debate, refinements and corrections, before enter it on the voting site. the FAQ page also needs a similar update.

As we already have taken this decision many times, it is now time to clearly implement it in real life. If the persons in charge of the tgde.org website never have time to implement changes, I suggest that they should look for volunteers that can assist them in doing so, and teach them how to do it. I can volunteer for this work


Introducing "importance votes" for permanent voting section

created by Milan Malej (246) - 22 Mar 2007, 14:57

Proposals for WPE system and software changes

As continuation of the "List of approved proposals on improvements on the WPE software…" created by Mikael, I am putting some my own proposals about necessary changes of the WPE software. While these proposals also touch the way, how the WPE is working, I put them into separate proposals.

I kindly ask the members of General Assembly to consider and decide about:

Introducing "importance votes" for permanent voting section

75% of approval for remaining proposal in the permanent voting section seems to me too much. I lean more toward two third majority (67%) - if this way of evaluating will be accepted. But I want to propose something, according to my opinion, more effective.

The permanent proposals should be very important proposals. So also negative voting for such proposal is very important. It must be seen, what we don't want and what we must not do. It is not acceptable, that proposal simply disappears after it doesn't get sufficient percent of votes.

The solution can be introducing of additional other type of votes, so called "importance votes", beside the current normal "yes/no" or "agree/not agree" votes. If high percent of GA members will vote positively for the importance of the proposal (and not for the actual acceptability), the proposal could stay in the permanent section. A negative importance result will cause that proposal will be handled like today. This importance limit can be set to a higher percent, like it is proposed already for normal votes.

I would like here to trigger two additional considerations and hear your comments:

1. Would we exclude the delegated voting entirely from the importance voting?

2. Would it be necessary to explain your importance vote? This could be also done anonymously, but already now the voting for everyone is traceable through its history.

Dynamic subcategories

created by Milan Malej (246) - 22 Mar 2007, 15:07

Proposals for WPE system and software changes

As continuation of the "List of approved proposals on improvements on the WPE software…" created by Mikael, I am putting some my own proposals about necessary changes of the WPE software. While these proposals also touch the way, how the WPE is working, I put them into separate proposals.

I kindly ask the members of General Assembly to consider and decide about:

Dynamic subcategories

With the goal to increase the readability, comparability and searching possibility of accepted and accepting proposals I would introduce (beside linear list of proposals, additionally) in each voting category so called "dynamic subcategories". The subcategories mean grouping of proposals, which are equal, similar, maybe opposing… With collecting the proposals and decisions, which relate to the same problem, we could:

-> Make fast overview of the matter according to given problem. -> Make extracts, overviews and summaries from similar proposals. -> Make comparisons between opposite proposals. -> Take the best from more similar proposals and make common proposals. -> This function should enable authors of similar proposal to find themselves and work interactively and independently to prepare their common, for all acceptable proposal. -> Further working of such "temporary commissions" will give to their common proposal certainly larger importance. That could be already one part of mechanism of ordering proposals according to their importance. The groups of authors could also discuss about possibility and time-schedule for proposal realization. -> Grouping will diminish the number of (similar) proposals, because in advance it will be much easier to check already given proposals and accepted decisions. We will be able to concentrate only to the improvements or differences.

Dynamic subcategories mean that subcategories could be created according to the problem, which appears and doesn't fit into any of already existing subcategory. Who would be able to create a new subcategory, is the matter of debate (maybe proposed by author). The grouping and common proposal creation could be lead by moderator, selected by executive director or voted from the group of authors inside subcategory.

For test I will make on the Wiki in next weeks proposal grouping of two categories, probably Environment and Global Democracy Project. If someone is interested to do additional work in this direction, you are welcome…

List of approved proposals on improvements on the WPE software that has not yet been taken care of

1. Global governance and global institutions should be added as a voting category so as to allow discussion on the roles of those institutions, their possibilities of reform and the type of relations that they should have with the national states and the general assembly.

2. Votes pages, as well as the useful little tick that tells us whether we have voted on each vote, should also have some way of indicating when there is a comment we have not read.

3. The World Parliament should institute a new category of vote: "Permanent/Open Vote".

4. Permanent/ Open votes would always be current so that new members could always vote on them immediately. They would allow members to change their votes if their views change.

5. Notice about the length of the period before login times out should be clearly displayed and a warning reminder given for "create vote" and "comment".

6. We shall have a possibilty to go directly to "my next unvoted current/future vote" from each vote, so we do not have to click so many times to go between the different votes.

7. Make it possible to update your votes until the voting deadline. The reasons for this are: 1. To prevent errors because people vote wrongly by mistake. 2. To prevent pressure from other people who "looks over your shoulder" when you vote. If i.e. your boss or partner presures you to vote in one direction while looking over your shoulder while you vote, you can later modify the vote by changing it, when they do not look over your shoulder. This diminishes the risk for vote selling and corruption. 3. You can have the right to change your mind about an issue, after that you have been convinced by better arguments.

8. We shall have a “recent changes” personal page on the site, where we can see what has happened since last log-in, i.e. new votes, comments etc, so that we easier can find what´s new.

9. The list of General Assembly members should be sorted by their Country of Nationality, by their Membership Joining Date, etc.

10. Reintroduce delegated voting, with no delegation as basic setting.

11. We have to make a better presentation of the delegated voting system, in order to make it more comprehensive and useable.

12. That the website be amended to refer to voting proposals as ‘Proposals’ rather than votes, to avoid confusion when referring to individual members’ votes (i.e. Yes/No/Abstain).

13. That votes collected in the "Program" section be "archived" after 4 months to allow site navigation to move more quickly

14. Add a section to the website entitled "Vote Archive," which records proposals chronologically, on a week-by-week basis, starting with the most recent. The success or failure of each proposal should at minimum be displayed with each archived proposal's title, which should link to that proposal's page.

15. Paged navigation should at minimum allow the user to navigate to the next week / previous week

16. That any message on the "Home" page indicate when it was last updated and in particular that any announcement of something new be dated.

17. Vote Duration may be set at permanent, or be given a date for voting to end.

18. Drafts for permanent proposals will be ratified when reaching a "significant member satisfaction point" of 75% (three quarters majority) over a minumum of one week. If, after two weeks the draft still has not reached 75% approval, it will be automatically deleted. An author may delete their own draft proposal at any time.

19. Permanent proposals must retain a member approval of 75% to remain in the permanent voting section. Proposals losing approval will revert to the "draft" section automatically for one week to allow the author to consider revising the text and allow other members to further discuss the proposal. The author may also set a different "end-date" for voting if desired. Authors of proposals will receive an email to advise them of the re-drafting of their proposal.

20. Proposals being voted on will be ranked according to their level of approval.

21. Non-permanent votes achieving 75% member approval at closure will be archived with date, title and approval rating

22. Members logging in will chose to have 1, 2 or 3 hours before a time-out occurs

23. When creating votes, a warning will be displayed that comments should be prepared in another application and pasted to avoid being lost

24. Discussions will automatically appear below proposals without further clicking

25. Switch to a faster server than the current one.

26. Publish the source code of the WPE software

27. Members of the World Parliament should be able to "watch" the discussion on a proposal so that an email is sent to them when there is a new posting as it is in the World-Democracy Forum.

28. Deleting the possibility of linking a website to a member name at the time of registration. If you look (also from WPE) known members, you will see that practicly no one from them is using this option and that it is entirely unnecessary. If a member really want to advice a website, he can do it in his participied message.

29. Administration control of incomming mails. If they include commercial contents or have linked such websites, the administrator or moderators should delete them without any warning. In case of doubt they should warn the author to explain or correct the mail.

30. There should be a text on the "create vote" website recommending participants to first enter their votes in the Primary Production area for debate, refinements and corrections, before enter it on the voting site. the FAQ page also needs a similar update.

31. Introduce "importance votes", beside the current normal "yes/no" or "agree/not agree" votes. If high percent of GA members will vote positively for the importance of the proposal (and not for the actual acceptability), the proposal could stay in the permanent section. A negative importance result will cause that proposal will be handled like today. This importance limit can be set to a higher percent, like it is proposed already for normal votes.

32 Dynamic subcategories

With the goal to increase the readability, comparability and searching possibility of accepted and accepting proposals I would introduce (beside linear list of proposals, additionally) in each voting category so called "dynamic subcategories". The subcategories mean grouping of proposals, which are equal, similar, maybe opposing… With collecting the proposals and decisions, which relate to the same problem, we could:

-> Make fast overview of the matter according to given problem. -> Make extracts, overviews and summaries from similar proposals. -> Make comparisons between opposite proposals. -> Take the best from more similar proposals and make common proposals. -> This function should enable authors of similar proposal to find themselves and work interactively and independently to prepare their common, for all acceptable proposal.


Personal tools

sl
דומיין בעברית  דומיין  דומין  תוכנה לניהול  קשרי לקוחות  CRM, ניהול קשרי לקוחות  דומין בעברית  פורומים  ספרדית  גיבוי