Concept for Simplified CiviWiki Design for Next Milestone
The following is a proposal for a simplified version of CiviWiki we should be able to achieve in the next development cycle.
Simplified linking: Problems link to nothing. Causes Link to Problems, Solutions link to Causes.
Simplified Bills: No Bill Tracking (yet). But, solution civies include space to link bill text document (Traditional upload limited to certain recognized document types - virus safe preferably?), as well as space to identify the local, state or federal actor.
Simplified Bills Part 2 : To give this impact, we must create a simple system to export spreadsheet information on how many users registered within a relevant district support or oppose any given solution (Relevant District = local, congressional district, state, federal, international).
Remove the Beta Blocker: Remove beta blocker and allow anyone to use the invite system to solicit new members via email.
Vision for this Milestone: With a stable system to write civies that terminate in an identifiable call of action (Bill, ordinance, executive order), addressed to an institutional actor (President, Congress, state legislature, local rep). We can automatically produce petition documents. Though an incomplete version of Civiwiki, this milestone would allow us to test our discussion system while developing useful data to petition representatives.
Include thoughts or ask clarifying questions below
Brylie Christopher Oxley Wed 7 Feb 2018 5:59PM
Bill linking
I would recommend just using a URL instead of file upload (for the time being).
Export data
There may be a relatively easy recipe for exporting Django model data as CSV. Otherwise, lets just stick with HTML templates for now.
Institutional scope
Regarding the institutional scope, how about starting with the following?
- country
- state (or region)
- city
We can build in more refined grouping in a later milestone, once we start working with APIs.
Poll Created Mon 12 Feb 2018 6:30PM
Vote on Simplified Design for Milestone 2 Closed Sun 18 Mar 2018 12:03AM
Up-vote Down Vote or Discuss Below
Results
| Results | Option | % of points | Voters | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
Agree | 100.0% | 1 |
|
| Abstain | 0.0% | 0 | ||
| Disagree | 0.0% | 0 | ||
| Block | 0.0% | 0 | ||
| Undecided | 0% | 4 |
|
1 of 5 people have participated (20%)
MItchell D. West · Mon 29 Jan 2018 9:04PM
Related to this proposal, I wanted to mention the possibility of linking our voting on Civi solutions to Democracy Earth's Sovereignty project (https://github.com/DemocracyEarth/sovereign). Their system only uses traditional forums to vote. I think our discussion platform could help build n the success of their secured voting system. But I don't know how easy it would be for the two apps to interact. Could someone perhaps take a look at their repo to see if this is a possibility?