Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

I created a kind of micro discussion/decision making system that didn't generate much interest from people I talked to and perhaps shares a flaw with this concept.

Basically if you look at what people use text for online it usually isn't anything serious, even these discussions don't have all that much gravity and HN is probably the most serious site I've seen.

Text also has less emotion and involvement attached and I think a lot of people won't connect with a text based system like this or won't feel comfortable contributing.

An idea for a way to feed peoples passions would be some kind of automatically generated video conference setup to split people into random think tank groups based on availability for each policy they indicate they want to be part of. Then perhaps one person, presumable someone that indicates they feel comfortable writing could contribute on behalf of their group to the text based policy page.




Initially, I was thinking the system would be more useful not for the general public, but for politicians. It could be used at federal, provincial, and municipal levels, for example.

I agree with you that text is too impersonal. The support page aims to address that somewhat by allowing video content: https://bitbucket.org/djarvis/world-politics/wiki/Supporting...

I like the idea of video conferencing. That's a rather forward-looking application. You could use speech-to-text systems for automatic dictation. An issue with video conferencing is scheduling people for simultaneous discussion.


You may be interested in http://caae.phil.cmu.edu/picola/current.html http://caae.phil.cmu.edu/picola/ . I'm not too familiar with it and i don't think it automatically splits people into groups but it was created with Fishkin's Deliberative Polling in mind.


Could you provide a link to your system? I'm curious.





Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: