Dear all!
Here are two items resulting mainly from the discussion in the other list:
A.
It might be useful if the new members who joined WDDM after December 2005 also
participated in the "How To Proceed with WDDM Organizing?" poll of Dec. 18,
2005. There were altogether 7 main questions and some technical questions
listed at the end of this page: http://www.world-wide-democracy.net/Wiki/HowToProceedPoll
Thus new members are invited to send in their replies to these questions, and
their responses will be added to the above page.
Of all the original questions, especially the first three is still very
relevant. These are:
1. Why have you become a WDDM member?
2. What should WDDM try to achieve?
3. Does WDDM need a decision making mechanism (voting)?
B.
Future website changes:
Because
(i) the moderation of the mailing list (or the site) by one or two people,
however hard they try to be impartial, is in principle undemocratic,
and
(ii) because many of you apparently prefer to work through e-mail only, and do
not like to login into the site Forum, and contribute there,
I am thinking about the following changes:
1. Make the "e-mail only" participants as equal as possible with the "login"
ones, by making it possible to post directly to the web forum by sending one's
post to a dedicated e-mail address.
2. To have "collective moderation" - everybody would be able to rate other
members' posts in the Forum, and only those posts that would receive a minimum
level of approval would survive and be visible to external visitors to see
them, and represent a kind of collective wisdom we arrived at. This rating
could again be done after login on the site, or through an e-mail command
(e.g., immediately from the e-mail message that brought the post to all
subscribers).
3. If needed, voting to be done again either directly on the site, or by
sending e-mails to dedicated e-mail addresses. Or maybe only by e-mail?
4. All members (or anybody?) could also attach ratings to all the links to
external resources - such as sites, movements, parties, books, ....
In the end, the site could be fully automated, all the deliberations could be
done without any need for the intervention of a moderator or coordination
committee, all would be equal. It could become a demonstration of "politics
without politicians".
It would require extensive changes to (replacement of) the current Wiki/Forum.
However, the existing contents will be preserved/archived.
It would not be trivial, would have to be done in phases, could take many
months to complete and fine tune.