Great to hear Jim, and thanks for starting up this new group too.

A couple initial thoughts. Seems like building in something that allows people to use current sites/tech they may be using could make sense (YouTube, Twitter, Flickr, etc.)

Taking into consideration the interplay between online and real world seems to factor in too. Some people are much more comfortable real world and other much more comfortable online. Building something where both can work happily, not that know what that looks like.

I'm attending an Obama Home Meeting this Thursday night based on something he sent to his list recently.

Here's what the agenda looks like (which might offer other ideas):

Jim I'm so happy to hear about your plans for vitalvermont! I'm no good at making Web sites, but so often recently have thought how important it is to engage better with my community. Sad to say that I'm not very connected in my locale.

Last week Facebook and Google released new features. I'm not sure what my problem is but I never seem to grok stuff that Facebook does. Google's Friend Connect makes more sense and it maybe something to consider for adding social features to the site.

The main thing about Web sites nowadays is they have to help people do things together. I'm an online admirer of Phil Jones an intrepid blogger. Because blogs are so timely, arguments are often developed over time so it's hard to provided links to posts that wrap everything up neatly. Phil has lots to say over his various blogs. But in any case this post makes an interesting case for walled gardens as place for people to do stuff online.

But let's get back to Widgets in social networks. Or what I have started calling the "YASN-as-platform". Here we see the other side of Hagel's unbundling : the separation of product innovation from customer relationship management. What the YASN-as-platform does is make that true in software, it allows the product innovator or feature developer to treat the customer relation infrastructure as yet another service, to be accessed through standard APIs.

Phil's piece is rather long, but it's got some great stuff in it. He presents as a thought experiment a feature called Baby Rota.

Probably that piece isn't along the lines of what you're thinking of for this thread. But I raise it because one of the fundamental things everyone is concerned about is making a living. I know I live in a rather poor area so one of the needs of the community are ways to develop some income. Phil's insights about how Web tools can be used to this end seem quite thoughtful.

Ah it's too late and I'm not making sense. I guess my two points are: The Web site should to have ways that people can do things together. It would be really great if the Web site helped people find ways to develop economic activity between them.

I'm attending an Obama Home Meeting this Thursday night based on something he sent to his list recently.

Here's what the agenda looks like (which might offer other ideas):

Wow Mark, that's exactly the sort of thing that I'm after! Will anyone take minutes at the meeting? I'd love to hear what unfolds!

When you say ' based on something he sent to his list. ' Which list do you mean?

Obama is calling for people to step up and do the work that needs to be done in their local communities (and the world.) And you've got a great face to face meeting there that addresses the questions of Who and What.

That puts a little more light on my challenge: I want to connect groups like this to their local town government in whatever ways are beneficial. A representative from the local town offices could offer some perspective that keeps the meetup's goals in line with the goals that the Town has been working on. The local government (planning and zoning, steering committees, etc.) has been in the position of asking similar questions, and shaping their local communities, but they're Hippos compared to today's Cheetahs that are empowered by the moment.

So ideally, vitalvermont would take whatever goals come out of your meeting, and help people track the steps and progress of that effort. By doing this transparently, any hidden talents, insight or skills in the town could be harnessed to refine the goals and execution. The town and state representatives would simply be among the voices that contribute... But it's somehow important to me that the successes that come out be something that the whole town can take pride in as well.

Please let me know what happens at the meeting! -Jim

John Powers said:

Jim I'm so happy to hear about your plans for vitalvermont!

Thanks John!

Last week Facebook and Google released new features. I'm not sure what my problem is but I never seem to grok stuff that Facebook does. Google's Friend Connect makes more sense and it maybe something to consider for adding social features to the site.

I've been desensitized to the term 'Friend' as used in social networks, so Google's Friend Connect has not caught my attention, but I'll go look at it.

The main thing about Web sites nowadays is they have to help people do things together.

I agree. Doing things together energizes people, and starts to ensure that they're focusing on the more beneficial aspects. The current way that anything is accomplished is through individual efforts, or committees that meet at Town Hall and slowly try to raise some money and make something happen. We just want to accelerate & empower that.

I'm an online admirer of Phil Jones an intrepid blogger. Because blogs are so timely, arguments are often developed over time so it's hard to provided links to posts that wrap everything up neatly.

I'll read up on Phil.

Probably that piece isn't along the lines of what you're thinking of for this thread. But I raise it because one of the fundamental things everyone is concerned about is making a living. I know I live in a rather poor area so one of the needs of the community are ways to develop some income. Phil's insights about how Web tools can be used to this end seem quite thoughtful.

My thoughts are that Obama is hoping that an empowered middle class leads to empowered entrepreneurs, and ultimately creates many small businesses which employ several people each. Helping someone create the business through community feedback (as we've seen here on Ned) would be a benefit. Another possibility is to let people exchange services through VitalVermont.com, letting networks of people be as effective as a business, but in a less formal way. In this case Vital Vermont might be seen as a peer-to-peer 'temp agency' where people sign up with skills, and are employed whenever possible.

Ah it's too late and I'm not making sense. I guess my two points are: The Web site should to have ways that people can do things together. It would be really great if the Web site helped people find ways to develop economic activity between them.

That's exactly where I want to go! I'm going to continue this particular subject into its own discussion, because it's a layer on top of transparency in government.

Mark Grimes said:

Here's what the agenda looks like (which might offer other ideas):

Ok, so recognizing that most of the good work happens face-to-face, what if there were a web-based tool that let people refine an agenda?

If the agenda were carefully detailed with community input, it might solicit ideas and priorities that set the meeting up to be more effective. Even people who don't plan on going to the meeting would be able to say, "I know you'll do the right thing, but please make sure you consider X."

I can picture a Ned-like system where people bring up what they think should be on the agenda, and the ideas that get the most feedback would be worked into the agenda for the meeting. People might be tempted to be too specific, but when that specific idea is incorporated into the agenda, it would simply be summarized and phrased as something for the committee to consider.

LOL apparently I wrote a long comment in this thread yesterday and forgot to click save. Opps.

I noticed to day via TPM that the transition team has rolled out a new Web site Open for Questions where people can vote thumbs up, thumbs down, or inappropriate question.

>>Wow Mark, that's exactly the sort of thing that I'm after! Will anyone take minutes at the meeting? I'd love to hear what unfolds!<<

I'll do my best to take notes, and even Twitter if it seems right for the occasion.

>>When you say ' based on something he sent to his list. ' Which list do you mean?<<

Sorry, the Barack Obama email list.

>> Ok, so recognizing that most of the good work happens face-to-face, what if there were a web-based tool that let people refine an agenda?<<

That could be very interesting. One would imagine most first meetings are about sharing ideas, it could be nice to explore some of the beforehand online somehow.

>>People might be tempted to be too specific, but when that specific idea is incorporated into the agenda, it would simply be summarized and phrased as something for the committee to consider.<<

Behold the beauty of Twitter, the wonder of brevity, and the power of a good simple idea well presented.

Jim, oddly enough, your question is going to make me go in a very different direction.

I think the tools are there, the experiments providing "proof of concept" are there.

Whats needed is a strategic framework. Where Obama's big ideas hit the road will be reform of existing policy instruments like GPRA and the knitting together of agency-specific transparency tools (each with their own culture and needs eg compare DoD with IRS with BLM).

I think something similar is needed at the local level - what are the constellations of power in different communities, and how do you get them onto the same reform bandwagon?

Also, have you seen http://www.frontporchforum.com? Could be a great place to collaborate, combine forces and eliminate reinvention...

It's probably just as well my long post got lost, because it was long;-) The shorter version is that transparency in government and transparency in online spaces are different.

Michael Wesch a professor of cultural anthropology at KSU makes the point in his famous YouTube video The Machine Is Us/ing Us makes the point we'll have to rethink a few things, including governance.

In asking what "Google for Government" might look like, as you go down in size the search becomes less about facts and more about people and social engagements. It becomes searches for solutions, affinities and trust.

At the local level many of the stuff that communities may want to do have political implications, but aren't politics as usual. John Robb has been championing resilient communities. He addresses the subject in a recent post and links to Transition California which uses Ning effectively. Certainly the Web site is worth a look.

John Husband coined the term wirearchy in 1999:

Wirearchy - "a dynamic two-way flow of power and authority based on information, knowledge, trust and credibility, enabled by interconnected people and technology"

Husband contrast wirearchy and hierarchy. But he also makes the point that both forms of organization exist. Our models of governance in mind are hierarchal, but as we move more locally and participate in online spaces we have a different sort of model in mind. What we think of as "transparency" according to one model isn't the same in the other.

Ethan Zuckerman has been blogging the Berman Center conference on Internet and Politics: Open for Questions: Participation, from campaigning to governing and The changing relationship between internet and politics?.

Lots of stuff going on in the posts. But he mentions The Google Moderator platform. On the subject of tools I thought the use of kluster at the Charter for Compassion Web site useful. It's interesting to see decision making tools built in.

Hi all,

Not so long ago, I discovered how the UK is tackling this at the local government level. Ironically, as soon as I joined the discussion forum, I discovered myself what it meant to be digitally excluded as one of a handful of contributors.

http://www.communities.gov.uk/co mmunities/digitalinclusion/resou rces/

Interestingly digital exclusion was one of the first things we got involved with as a social enterprise, when our founder Terry Hallman first came across from the US in 2004. British Telecom, the national broadband provider were holding back rollout plans on the grounds of it being not cost effective to upgrade telephone exchanges. He made the point then, as he had done in the US before, that without high speed internet access, democracy and opportunity would be limited to those most digitally enabled. A simple illustration was a government brochure available free as a large PDF, and unreadable to those on dial-up.

In his 2006 'Marshall Plan' paper, delivered to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee where Obama was expected to read it, he makes the following case for investing in affordable broadband infrastructure nationwide.

"Availability of affordable, modern day Internet access is crucial to any nation’s economic development. This is by now a truism and does not need much elaboration. It is enough to understand that nothing whatsoever can happen in terms of social, economic, civic, and political development without communication. To the extent that communication is limited or completely absent, development is equally limited. If demonstration of this is needed, each reader is invited to do the following. For the next week, do not speak, do not write, do not read, do not listen to or access any form of communication in any way. With those restrictions, it might still be possible to survive for a week. Extend the same restrictions indefinitely, and basic survival will be at risk. It is almost impossible to imagine life without communications of any kind."

I guess the message got through ;-)

What we do have here and something I'm a fan of is a private initiative, called 'They Work For You' which spells it out rather nicely. I get mail alerts based on triggers for when any topic is discussed or member speaks and may comment back.

Here for example, as a member claims credit for helping democracy in Ukraine, I can point out that while they entertain foreign politicians at public expense to chat about soccer, we're tackling real issues.

http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wh all/?id=2008-04-30b.101.1&s= ukraine+westminster+hall#g122.0

Yes, I know it's a rant. At least it's there for posterity when we achieve something in spite of them.

John Powers said:

I noticed to day via TPM that the transition team has rolled out a new Web site Open for Questions where people can vote thumbs up, thumbs down, or inappropriate question.

Fantastic John! I noticed that this morning on Digg. I've already started to copy it, and typed up the following outline in my Vital Vermont notes:

Our Priorities

List your concern, and agree with all those 
below which you support.  Each Priority has 
its own discussion attached.

Each Priority would have an I agree button 
next to it, which people would push when they 
think someone said something they agree with.

It's could really help local government get direct feedback on what residents are willing to advocate. I can imagine it would be a good place for the people who have first hand knowledge of the issues to discuss ideas with their peers.

someone (at) mit.edu said:

Whats needed is a strategic framework. Where Obama's big ideas hit the road will be reform of existing policy instruments like GPRA and the knitting together of agency-specific transparency tools (each with their own culture and needs eg compare DoD with IRS with BLM).

You're thinking on a grander scale than I am for this project, and I like it.

I think something similar is needed at the local level - what are the constellations of power in different communities, and how do you get them onto the same reform bandwagon?

It will be interesting to see what groups self-organize and end up making things happen. If the power of those who seldom come out of the woodwork were able to express themselves where they were likely to be heard (as on ned,) I think it would be fascinating to see what bandwagons develop.

Also, have you seen http://www.frontporchforum.com? Could be a great place to collaborate, combine forces and eliminate reinvention...

You are the fourth person to mention Front Porch Forum to me. I'm aware of it, and plan to integrate with it, but don't see how it alone can start to address the sort of build consensus, then summarize power that I have in mind. What it can do though, is be like an RSS feed where on a weekly basis, any good developments could be summarized and sent out as a FPF mailing.

Wow Jeff, John! Lots to take in, lots of great information there. I've got my reading cut out for me.

Ok, great start. Now, I want to focus a bit on the mechanisms that I do and don't want to have on VitalVermont.com.

Firstly, I don't see it as a place for open discussions, that's what we have Ned.com for, and Front Porch Forums, and Facebook, and all that... It's also purposely not going to be a clearinghouse of local businesses, except those who offer a service necessary for the tasks at hand.

What's hard to do with the current social networks is to track progress on a task that many people are cooperating on.

In my hometown of Hinesburg, we recently had a fire destroy the local cheese maker (story here) and it's a big deal to the town to find a good business to take its place. This might involve keeping a list of prospects, doing advertising, and keeping a list the attributes that an ideal replacement landowner / employer would have. So when someone finds a new prospect, they would add it to the list, and rate it on the criteria that people have chosen. Of course the decision of who to sell to is up to the current owner, but the town can have lots of influence on the decision, especially if during the process many people came together in agreement.

It's these more complex nuts & bolts processes that I want to facilitate. Generally, they're things that have three phases: planning, execution, and completion. Ongoing tasks would be composed of several smaller (possibly recurring) tasks which can be marked as complete. During planning, anyone in the community could commit to one or more tasks... and during execution, you would be able to watch the list as they log their progress. Logging progress might be as simple as, "I've started!" followed by "It's complete."

I think VitalVermont.com would also be able to handle the budgets associated with these sorts of projects, so every financial transaction related to a project would be done transparently, and over time the 'many eyes' effect would lead to more effective use of budget, and more realistic future budgets which use projections based on what things cost in the past.

One of the first ways that I want to get things off the ground is to meet a real need in Hinesburg where we want to encourage carpooling. Hinesburg is on a very busy road, and it's easy to imagine half the cars with twice as many people in each... making the town, and country a better place in the obvious ways. So anyone willing to do some data entry to indicate their commutes could be matched with others who have similar commutes. In this case, you have a few easy steps that lead to people accomplishing common goals. There's no general discussion going on besides the two commuters comparing their schedules privately, but the benefit to the community is potentially huge.

So, what other ways can we accomplish great happenings with coordinated small efforts by many people in a community?

Imagine this entry on the town's list of projects...

Life would be better for everyone if I collected my thought before spouting off. I'm afraid that's not going to happen, but I mean no disrespect by spouting off.

Your vision is so interesting Jim. This past weekend Rob Patterson hosted a conference on John Boyd's ideas and I started a thread about it here. One of the speakers at the conference was Rory Francis. Francis leads the Prince Edward Island Bio Alliance. I think you'd find Paterson's post on his talk relevant to what you want to do. If you take the bait and go to that link be sure to also follow the link to Patterson's Trusted Space pages (that link is to a post there on PEI Bio Alliance).

Here's a link to a story about people on PEI rallying to rebuild a lumber mill destroyed by arson.

As I'm sure I've mentioned, I don't know squat about coding or computer science. And I'm not very good at figuring out how to use the computer tools I already use. So my appreciation of tools is somewhat lacking. Nevertheless when I read:

So when someone finds a new prospect, they would add it to the list, and rate it on the criteria that people have chosen.

I thought that's the sort of thing that kluster had figured out how to build software for.

I also thought of Google Tasks and imagined a community widget something like it that people could put wherever they put their widgets. Not sure anything like that has been developed yet, just thought it would be cool.

I think it's really hard to get people to participate in wikis, but it seems that lots of the stuff you'd like VitalVermont.com to do seems to lend itself to a wiki. Or perhaps even better a social spreadsheet of some sort. Some of the examples on the EditGrid site are quite cool. But getting over the hump of adoption is a big deal.

How to handle the money issues also seems quite a pesky challenge to surmount. Part of the challenge is dealing with the combination of volunteers, donations, cash expenditures, in kind contributions, taxes, etc. When it comes to money, price is always an issue. "My time is worth more than your time!" One of the things that alternative currencies have going for them is leveling out some of these price problems sometimes. Of course getting people to adopt alternative currencies is at least as hard as getting people to use wikis. Both can be done, but both are hard.

Nevertheless Time Dollars have been around long enough, and been put to use in such a variety of contexts, that I think they deserve a look. Paying everyone's labor in cash is bound to be hard to set up. I actually think it might reduce some of the complexity to pay for most labor through a Time Bank.

John, why are you pointing me to Kluster, Time Dollars, Google Tasks and all that, how would you integrate all of them in a cohesive way? How would you get a community to use that set of sites to solve the problem? My effort is probably most like Basecamp, but that doesn't solve the whole problem either.

What I'm looking for is lots of examples of problems that a community, and their town offices might collaborate on. With those examples, I'm going to build a new web site.

OK, wonderful meeting last night (13 people) and I started to Twitter it, but Perry took notes which will be shared here at Ned. Looks like we're going to use Ned as the action hub, note sharing and online discussion forum.

Jim,

The thing about neighborhood-based forums it seems to me is that there is a natural constituency to move from discussion to action - people are near, sometimes dear, and invested.

I'd argue that FPF is somewhere between Craigslist and a discussion forum. I can tell you that it is a place where local officials look in to get a sense of constituents, which is neat.

So I'm curious to know what the incentive is to create an additional layer of networking - or to participate in one if one feels bound to a set of place-based relations online already?

When I hear you write up your vision, it sounds like a mashup of a pledge-bank "pitch in together" engine and something of a craigslist. What are the barriers to exploring collaboration in implementing this as a feature to an existing place-based platform?

There's this other trend that's emerging here too, which I'm sure you're aware of - timebanks. Washington County has one starting out in Montpelier - http://onionriverexchange.org - and I know there are others in Plainfield, Burlington, Middlebury.

My concern is that there are too many local startup networks competing for limited time and attention and its the time to start joining them up. I think that would be of much greater value added - at both ends - for citizens and for government - such a fabric could be the joining "glue" - a neutral space as it were.

What do you think?

this caught my eye jim:

Citizen Media and Online Engagement Webinar E-Democracy.Org is planning a "webinar" on citizen media and online engagement in local communities.

For the fifth in our series of Rural Voices outreach events, this live and interactive presentation will be "everywhere."

We plan to combine telephone access for audio with computer screen sharing for slides and some live web demonstrations. We may even try a bit of video.

Part One - Citizen Media and Online Engagement Introduction - 45 Minutes Part Two - Online Issues Forums for Local Participation - 45 Minutes Participation is free for those who live in Greater Minnesota (thanks to our Rural Voices grant from the Blandin Foundation). Those who live in the Twin Cities and outside of Minnesota are asked to make a donation of any amount before the event. These are some of the slides we will be adapting. Those calling in for audio may have long-distance charges.

The exact time (likely 2 p.m. Central) and date in late January or early February has yet to be set. Please check back on this page or join the new Minnesota Voices online community to be notified of the exact time and date. If you have questions, contact us.

Space may be limited. To "reserve" your space now, please add your name, city, state/country and organization, blog/org link, etc. here - press edit:

Steven Clift, Minneapolis, MN, E-Democracy.Org, http://e-democracy.org Ross Williams, Grand Rapids, MN, Northern Community Internet, http://www.northerncommunityinte rnet.org Dan Thiede, St. Paul, MN, The Minnesota Project (http://www.mnproject.org) & CERTs (http://www.cleanenergyresourcete ams.org) Persephone Miel, Boston MA www.mediarepublic.org Elizabeth McLean, Washington DC, non-profit web tools advocate Nancy LaRoche, Minneapolis, MN Non-profit Web site volunteer Danna MacKenzie, Grand Marais, MN Cook County IT and Boreal Access

Thank you. Your expression of interest will help us select the best tools to use for this live online gathering.

So, ok I get it... there's plenty of existing web sites and mailing lists that accomplish what you think I'm trying to accomplish.

I'm still interested in how they relate to transparency in government, and new ideas on what you would want to see on your home town's web site.

One of the interesting things about the Portland/Obama house party last night was (needless to say) all 13 people had 1-2 primary issues that were important to them. Poverty, food, sustainability, hunger, children, education, environment, economy, to name some of the most frequently mention things. The action oriented brainstorming session was aimed to come up with actionable ideas. Perry did a great job making sure everyone's voice and ideas were heard.

That's not quite what I'm saying, Jim. What I'm asking are more about the pros and cons of collaborating with the right "player" and their members to expand their tool set, vs building from scratch?

In terms of transparency, I think one of the most important connections is with the government agencies and personnel themselves - so that the tools are not perceived as "gotcha" tools. What would be your strategy to partner with local government?

someone (at) mit.edu said:

That's not quite what I'm saying, Jim. What I'm asking are more about the pros and cons of collaborating with the right "player" and their members to expand their tool set, vs building from scratch?

I'm building from scratch. The site exists, the graphic artist has been hired and paid, the rides-hare is half implemented. I'm not interested in alternatives to me creating a web site. Every time you dismiss the site as similar to something that exists, it's like a bucket of cold water on my motivation. Please stop. Please. This discussion is about NEW ways that a NEW web site can foster transparency in government. Don't worry, collaboration and 'gluing' together existing services will happen. It's just not what this discussion is about. I'm not ready for that step yet.

In terms of transparency, I think one of the most important connections is with the government agencies and personnel themselves - so that the tools are not perceived as "gotcha" tools. What would be your strategy to partner with local government?

By going to local committee meetings, and listening to what they want to do, and doing it for them.

So far, we have one good collaboration idea, and that's letting people edit agendas collaboratively. What would you like to see on your town's web site?