|DISCUSSION ON HOW TO PROMOTE DIRECT (TRUE) DEMOCRACY|
WDDM Executive Board will post all its dealings in this forum for the scrutiny of the members.
I’m going to use this forum to communicate with the executive board. Interesting, four votes have been cast in the current referendum on executive board communications. All votes to date sustain the decision to set up the board.
Just for the heck of it, I figured I’d weigh in with my priorities for WDDM. See below :
1. Providing a testing ground for technology-enabled direct democracy. No kidding. I really believe in this stuff. Representative democracy was the best system ... prior to modern communication technology. Or to put it more positively, modern communications technology allows for fundamental improvements in the average people’s ability to participate in discourse and decision.
The problem is, we haven’t figured out how technology-enabled democracy is supposed to work. Our physical-gathering 'Robert's Rules' democracy focuses on the current speaker and the current topic. Technology enabled democracy by contrast allows for parallel discussion on many topics and many voices at the same time. But we haven’t figured out how to run good discourse and decision in the technology-enhanced communication environment.
So, creating processes and rules for direct democracy in the age of modern comunications, That is my central priority for WDDM. I see WDDM not only as a place to talk and strategize about DD; but also as a place where we can create modern direct democracy.
I’ve liked plans of a few WDDM members working in this direction including Dan Rosen’s ‘Vote Direct,’ and Nic Durand’s ‘Enitiatives.’ Additionally, our charter’s requirement that executive decisions be validated by vote, is another cutting-edge experiment.
2. Improving the WDDM forum including:
2A. Retaining what works.
2B. Adding a policy for dealing with aggressive overposting (although just now I do not see anything that I’d consider an actionable problem).
2C. Enhancing the ability to carry out separate discussions on different issues. May I ask that youall have a look at the Forum my civic association maintains ( [www.northrosslyn.org] )? I like it. Our website somewhat separates discussion by topic so that we don't have discussion on rat control in the same place as postings on traffic safety. (aside, please do look at the film 'Save Wilson School' on our website. I worked on it.)
3. Democracy means both discourse and decision. We're great on the discourse side, but discourse without any view to decision is just chatter. How do we encourage members to propose motions for vote? Come to think of it, when will we the executive board start putting some items up as motions?
4. I think that we should define the responsibilities of the webmaster and elections authority. Mirek has done a wonderful job. Mirek is doing a wonderful job. I’d like to formally describe and authorize what he’s doing.
I learned about the concept of electoral tribunal in Costa Rica. It seems to me that it is a very attractive institution.
5. Developing relations with other DD groups.
6. The phrase ‘true democracy’ totally doesn’t work for me. Back in the 30s, some important intellectuals in the West argued that Stalin’s Russia was a ‘true democracy.’ Yike. I feel comfortable with the phrases ‘more democracy’ and ‘direct democracy.’ End of lecture from ‘Curmudgeon Mark’.
Thoughts on other people’s priorities:
1. The proposed WDDM mission statement didn't pass. I’m not much bothered, but several people did find the absence troubling.
2. Good luck on a DD glossary. But.... it may be difficult to get agreement on such things. The membership includes a wide range of political beliefs.
PS. Hope we're all having fun.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 06/10/2007 10:11PM by WddmAdmin.
|Re: Priorities||209||WebMaster||06/10/2007 10:25PM|
|Re: Priorities||218||BrEggum||06/10/2007 10:33PM|
|Re: Priorities||228||BrEggum||06/10/2007 10:27PM|