Issues from the previous General Discussion post:
1.1. An intranet or similar system to improve communication between Momentum branches
- Discussion now moved to Organisation 001
1.2. A collaborative research and rapid rebuttal capability
- Research: Research Capabilities 001 in General Discussion
- Rapid rebuttal: outstanding
- Collaboration: Collaborative Working 001 in Systems
1.3. Generating reference materials for public information and use in campaigning (especially online campaigning)
DP: the problem is to design a structure for online debate which is able to help us to produce good quality policy materials and good quality political education materials(This may not necessarily be best achieved by online debate as such. See Research Capabilities 001)
-outstanding
1.4. Creating small-scale, high-impact think tanks to provide a voice for left Labour views in public discourse, especially among the media
- Think Tanks 001
1.5. General co-ordination and encouragement of activists on social media and elsewhere; encouraging supporters to be pro-active, for example seeking out and politely intervening in online discussions or (on a purely individual basis) contributing to Wikipedia
-outstanding
1.6. Creating a directory of activists willing to offer their skills, interests, time, other resources, so that these can be matched with corresponding requirements
- Organisation 001
1.7. Generating and propagating 'best practice' in making our case - this covers everything from a readily-searchable data base of well-researched facts and figures up to detailed recommendations for a 'party line' on specific issues
-outstanding
1.8. Developing an organised route whereby individual anecdotes attested by Labour members can be 'harvested' and used for rhetorical purposes and possibly supplied as 'human interest' stories to the press
-outstanding
New Issues Arising:
2.1 stevemanc1 is developing his own system at momentumunofficial.freeforums.net. Initial responses from the LRP team and his own comments suggest that our two projects will remain separate and distinct, at least for now.
2.2 Loomio
- Loomio 001
2.3 DP:
A website which acts as a repository for substantial contributions is almost certainly required.- Research Capabilities 001
Then we need to talk about how debate can be organised. Left Futures for example has many qualities but the appearance of materials on different issues is virtually random. Can we set debating themes and try to tackle issues collectively?- Policy Development 001
Should be try to produce an on-line magazine?-outstanding
How should debate be moderated?- Research Capabilities 001
- Collaborative Working 001
What place, if any, should be given to theoretical issues along with practical ones?-outstanding
2.4 CM proposed 'a possible structure for a policy discussion system'
- Policy Development 001
2.5 CM also raised a security issue: checking credentials. Need to liase with Momentum/Labour
- Security 001
2.6 TW asked about a welcome page where people can introduce themselves. JW seemed to approve of the idea to some extent, so:
- Introduce yourself 001
2.7 TW: a manageably concise yet definitive history of UK politics since say 1970, with all the funny business left in - 'history uncut'. It's not impossible that actual credentialled historians might be tempted to participate in such a process in some way.
Speculatively suggested contacting John Simpkin. CM also speculatively suggested Leo Panitch.
- outstanding
2.8 Various scattered remarks on various aspects of technology - these are quoted as appropriate on a number of new posts.
2.9 JW:
I could host a 'community forum' (such as Vanilla Forums, phpBB and other free stuff) - I have access to a local Momentum group web hosting package, so this could happen straight away. (http://www.momentumrushcliffe.org.uk/ - nothing there at the moment - the hosting package has been paid for but nothing is happening with it yet)- outstanding
2.10 JW:
there is an untapped pool of like-minded members in my constituency...lots of new members (over 600) many of whom have, for example, University-gained professional skills they are willing to apply-outstanding/still untapped
2.11 CM:
...how to hold the administrators/moderators to account...We want to ensure that admins aren't in some way giving preference to those they agree with and also that admins aren't in some way directing the discussions.- Organisation 001; Security 001
There are various suggestions I can make to ensure that users' views are represented. This can include electing moderators and having the chief authority be a council selected by sortition. It would be good to have mechanisms in place in the software which allow for changes to these roles, including recall, to happen automatically.
Another issue is that of the sysadmin-type roles.
Please feel free to raise any further issues. If I've missed or misinterpreted anything, please raise it either here or in the appropriate comment thread.
Finally, here is another copy of a diagram depicting (what I take to be) some key areas and interactions. It is not intended to be prescriptive (though obviously it reflects roughly how I envisage the organisation might function once fully operational) but to prompt discussion.
