I am actually interested in this because of the relevancy problem. What is relevant and how do you decide if something is relevant to some previously described topic. If some authority, like a presiding officer, is the only one who can decide this then the authority may base his decision on some insipid process like prejudice or convenience. If it can be decided by a vote then the group's prejudices and momentary purposes and fashions may interfere with good decision making. Jim Bromer
On Sun, Nov 30, 2014 at 5:18 PM, Logan Streondj via AGI <[email protected]> wrote: > One of the "near-term" applications for SPEL/mwak is managing, > recording and summarizing deliberative assembly, tasks traditionally > reserved to presidents, chairmans and secretaries. > > The members would interact in a chat with the Prez (president), > who would make sure they have properly formulated "motions", > and then would post them to the main room in order. > > Robert's Rules is fairly large and specific on many points, > so much of it can be implemented in such a computerized setting. > Of course any rule set or parlimentary authority could be implemented. > > A benefit over traditional presidents is that it would speak all the > langauges involved with equal fluency, and provide translations for > all contents likewise. Thus it can be used for international business > and policy meetings/corporations etc. > > The Sert's (secretaries) main job is to keep an archive of current > policy and meeting minutes, which then can be queried by members, > either during or outside of a meeting. > > Of course we have to think about the current presidents, and chairmans > who tend to be some of the highest paid people in an organization. It > can be marketed to them as making things easier for them, such as > translation, making sure people have properly formulated motions, and > are generally following the rules of the process. > > The current presidents and vice-presidents don't have to feel > completely obsoleted, much like how we still have drone pilots, for > instance the president may choose which of several proposed motions > will be heard next, and other decisions which they wish to maintain > under their supervision, such as overiding time constraints or other > rules at their discretion. > > Otherwise anywhere it is acceptable to follow the rules rigourously, > the prez and sert could operate fully autonomously, in the example of > online discussion forums, community documentation, and possibly even > collaborative software development. > > -- > Logan Streondj > > > > ------------------------------------------- > AGI > Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now > RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/24379807-653794b5 > Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?&; > Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com ------------------------------------------- AGI Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/21088071-f452e424 Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=21088071&id_secret=21088071-58d57657 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
