I think I'd agree with primarily approaching it from the direction of postcodes to ensure people are properly invested in the areas they're volunteering for, and that they can recieve post in that area (of course you can jack a postcode from anywhere, but this isn't meant to be secure!)
Maybe the best method would be to initially insist on postcodes in the interface for easy lookup and investment, but then allow a separate mechanism by which you can add further constituencies without postcode if you really want to - so put a psychological barrier in the way. Perhaps this is all too defensive and over-complicating, but I think the issue of updating to new constituencies is reasonable if we want to make decent use of volunteers that sign up prior. -t Matthew Somerville wrote: > John Browning wrote: > >> A small thing, but I wonder if you're not getting too focussed on post >> codes. Seems easy to do in this group, but anyway... >> > > I guess it depends how much people would want to do their "own" > constituency (and therefore need a way of finding out what that is) - > Tom's original email Phase 3 included things like uploading election > leaflets, which presumably you would receive for your own constituency. > > I agree that for this project it might not be necessary, if people were > happy to just pick one they know is near them, and can pick their own > once they get any literature (assuming it's for the right one! ;) ). But > for people looking up, postcode is the easiest way of doing so if they > don't know. > > ATB, > Matthew > > _______________________________________________ Mailing list [email protected] Archive, settings, or unsubscribe: https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/listinfo/developers-public
