Benutzer-Werkzeuge

Webseiten-Werkzeuge


user:obel1x:public:neue_demokratie_mit_github

Unterschiede

Hier werden die Unterschiede zwischen zwei Versionen angezeigt.

Link zu dieser Vergleichsansicht

Beide Seiten der vorigen Revision Vorhergehende Überarbeitung
Nächste Überarbeitung
Vorhergehende Überarbeitung
user:obel1x:public:neue_demokratie_mit_github [2018/09/16 10:11]
Daniel [Neue Demokratie mit Github]
user:obel1x:public:neue_demokratie_mit_github [2018/10/01 11:03] (aktuell)
Daniel First Version finished
Zeile 7: Zeile 7:
 Erster Entwurf auf englisch hier: Erster Entwurf auf englisch hier:
  
-====== Goals of the Project "​Github for Descisions" ======+====== Goals of the Project "​Github for Discussions" ======
 ===== Background ===== ===== Background =====
-Over the years, Github has proven as very efficient and powerful Tool for developing Applications in all ways that programms ​are build. It offers the ability for everyone in any Project ​to contribute its own Sourcecode, without messing up other users work and and to have good work merged into final Applications ​in an easy way.+Over the years, Github has proven as very efficient and powerful Tool for developing Applications in all ways that programs ​are build. It offers the ability for everyone in any project ​to contribute its own sourcecode, without messing up other users work and and to have good work merged into final applications ​in an easy way.
  
-===== Proposal: Use Github for Descisions ===== +That wayvery large applications have evolvedoutscaling conservative programs in a considerable degree. My proposal would be to take those advantages to non-programming coordinations ​(like politicsscientific work and nearby anything where knowledge will improve my many individuals).
-Unfortunatellyas of nowall those good benefits of github are starting at the point where Sourcecode is written and improved. ​(Except of "​Issues"​which are pointing in the right directionPlease read on first.)+
  
-But programming starts much earylierWhen there are many people involved and working together in groups ​for projects, the process is beginning with an idea of what to do (change or invent new). Most Members of those Groups do not have Developer Backgroundsbut their ideas may be very inpiring for Developers and the project may strongly benefit from those+===== ProposalUse Github ​for Discussions ===== 
-So when discussing those ideas, basically the same thing happens in the minds of each individual:​ +As of nowall those good benefits ​of github are starting at the point where sourcecode ​is written ​and improved
-Starting from the existing "old state" (master-branch),​ each one proposes its own point of few as idea. This could be called idea-fork. While the discussion ​is evolving, some forks may combine to an aggregated view, some forks split from others when there are oppositional ideas, competing against the others. +
-At the end of that discussion, all forks will be reviewd (code compare) ​and rated - maybe by the group or by a leading member.+
  
-So the best rated "idea-fork" will be "​merged" ​to the old process ​(master). Everyone would now knowwhat to archive. Now, programming can start in an structured way.+But also programming itself starts earlier: If someone plans a programm or when there are some people involved and working together in groups for projects, ​the process is beginning with an idea of what to do (change or invent new). Some Members of groups may not have developer Backgroundsbut their ideas may be very inspiring for Developers and the project may strongly benefit from those ideas.
  
-So my proposal is, to extend github to support "​idea-forking",​ which could be used for all larger descissions even in private, or having non- programming background.+So when discussing those ideas, basically a "​github thing" happens in the minds of each individual:​ 
 +Starting from the existing situation (master-"​idea-branch"​),​ each one proposes its own point of few as idea. This could be called "​idea-fork",​ as they base on the actual situation and suggest what to change to improve it.\\ 
 +While the discussion is evolving, some idea-forks may combine to an aggregated idea, some forks may split from others when there are oppositional,​ competing against the other ideas. 
 + 
 +After that, all forks could be reviewd (code compare) and rated - maybe by the group vote or by a leading member, representing the group. 
 + 
 +So the best rated "​idea-fork"​ will be "​merged"​ to the old process. Everyone would now know, what to archive.  
 + 
 +Now, programming can start in an structured way, or mybe now there is a new knowledge of something or just a new way of how to do it. 
 + 
 +So my proposal is, to extend github to support "​idea-forking",​ which could be used for all larger descissions even in private, or having non- programming background ​to evolve existing situations.
  
 ===== Differences of "​idea-forks"​ ===== ===== Differences of "​idea-forks"​ =====
 There are some differences in "​idea-forks"​ to current "​program-forks",​ as of There are some differences in "​idea-forks"​ to current "​program-forks",​ as of
-  * ideas may not "​work",​ they are not technical. Also it will be the goal to deliver working improvements,​ they cannot be proven as programs can (do they compile??? Are they causing Errors?). If they do prove as bad, they may fail. But they could be changed starting with a new "​fork"​...+  * ideas may not "​work",​ they may not be technical. Also it will be the goal to deliver working improvements,​ they cannot be proven as programs can (do they compile??? Are they causing Errors?). If they do prove as bad, they may fail. But they could be changed starting with a new "idea-fork"​...
   * while "​program-forks"​ are mostly not opposing to each other, but covering different aspects of a program, ideas should be having multiple choices of one aspect. At The end only one choice can be chosen, the other ideas will become obsolete (but still important to see in history)   * while "​program-forks"​ are mostly not opposing to each other, but covering different aspects of a program, ideas should be having multiple choices of one aspect. At The end only one choice can be chosen, the other ideas will become obsolete (but still important to see in history)
-  * So resulting of this, the descission that is made at the end - if rated by the group - is based on "​soft-facts"​. There are very good ways to judge them in democratic way called systemic consencus, which will avoid the disadvantages of mayority decissions. +  * So resulting of this, the descission that is made at the end - if rated by the group - is based on "​soft-facts"​. There are very good ways to judge them in democratic way called systemic consencus, which will avoid the disadvantages of mayority decissions. ​This should be respected.
  
-===== How should it work ===== +===== What needs to be improved for this ===== 
-At first, the+Basing on githubfollwing functions would be needed (in my Point of view): 
 +  - Github does not have a "​wiki-view"​ on Texts supporting e.g. headlines, paragraphs, etc. When having larger projects, it would be very useful to have a user- friendly surface with functions for layouting text to make it more structured 
 +  - Github has hirarchical view in form of directorys. On wiki-level this should be handled by subpages to make them more readable (headline instead of directory-name) 
 +  - There needs to be a good way to compare ideas among one another and among the original, to quickly judge the benefits in a user-friendy way. Especially when there are a lot of ideas, this will be the largest challenge i guess. 
 +  - At least the needs to be a managed way to find the solution (setting up votes, define time periods, chosing how to merge)
  
-------------- +===== State ===== 
-Often People ​are in need to find Solutions for +Currently those are only thoughts of me, as unfortunatelly my spare time doesn'​t allow spending more time on this. I would hope to find someone that takes those ideas to an useful application or a new approach.
  
-Differences between programms and ideas:  +If you are interested in itpleas write to [[user:​obel1x|me]]RegardsDaniel
-- ideas may not "​work",​ they are not technical. It will not be the goal of this project, to deliver working ideas as programs are (do they compile ;)?)If they do prove as badthey can be changed starting with a new "​fork"​ +
-+
user/obel1x/public/neue_demokratie_mit_github.1537092685.txt.gz · Zuletzt geändert: 2018/09/16 10:11 von Daniel