Interface Design

Thanks to Stephen for mocking-up the first two pages of a voter interface design for Interactive Democracy. This was based on our discussions on the forum, please click here.
Some of the design criteria were:

1. simple and easy access that could be drilled down into for further detail
2. the facility to point out problems, suggest initiatives and vote on referendums
3. the ability to raise points for and against, to point out interesting aspects about the subject and to provide supporting information

This is a work in progress and any comments will be welcome.

Agreeing with Comments

Should comments placed on the Voter Interface each have a button so that you can agree or disagree with them?

Should comments with the most agreement rise to the top of the list and those with the most disagreement fall to the bottom?

Given that the number of comments is likely to be vast, perhaps there should be some way of organising them other than on a first-come/first-served basis. This could be achieved by this votes per comment system.

It may also be worth dissuading new comments that are similar to previous comments. This may be achievable by automatically matching words in one comment with words in the new one and then presenting a list of similar comments to the commentor. They may then prefer to add an "I agree" vote to an existing one, instead of publishing their own.

Ideas for the Voter Interface

The design of the web site interface that would allow us to vote could have an enormous influence over how effective Interactive Democracy would be. Here are some thoughts:

1. It should be easy to use


2. It should be split between questions, ePetitions and Referenda for local, national and supra-national votes


3. Each proposal should allow comments structured around Plus, Minus and Interesting points


4. Each proposal should allow questions to be asked, creating a thread of answers


5. Comments arising from Parliamentary debate should be given priority on any referenda issue


6. Comments from the government should also be highlighted (these may relate to timescales, funding and practical difficulties)


7. Comments made by MPs should carry their name


8. Links to Government and Parliamentary web pages should be allowed, to facilitate the presentation of good quality background information


9. Security should be similar to that used by Internet Banks, with a user name and password system to allow access


10. The search facility on the site should not introduce bias and should be approved by a Parliamentary technical committee


11. A complaints system should be available to highlight swearing and abusive comments which can then be removed by the web master - there may be escalating sanctions against repeat offenders

It's worth noting that other web sites may hold alternative debates and present their own information. Obviously these can be found by anyone using a search engine but they shouldn't have links placed on the Voting Interface. Only approved and quality checked statistics and reports should be presented on this central web site.