GitHub: A New Form of Arguing

In the following TED Talk Clay Shirky points out that the organisational technologies used to develop open-source code could be used to enhance democracy. In particular he introduces distributed version control software, GitHub: "Build software better, together." This allows uncoordinated and widely distributed programmers to develop code together, without central control or hierarchy. He suggests GitHub could be used to write laws in an open source way.
This is different from my concept of Interactive Democracy, which I see as a way of deciding what the law should be without the exact wording of it, but the two could work together. First ID, then GitHub.
But, one question is, does it take trained lawyers to write laws, or should everyone be able to have a go? Whatever the answer, GitHub could be scaled to provide a solution. It may have access restricted to MPs, allow contributions by qualified lawyers, or by everyone. And even if access were restricted, laws under development could be viewed by all, providing a safeguard and an educational opportunity.

For Bill(')s Sake!

I counted 105 Bills in the Lords and Commons in 2006/7. How much more law do we need... for Pete's sake?

As a mature democracy it's interesting that we continue to add new laws at such a rate... and it's a problem for Interactive Democracy because, unlike professional politicians, the public are unlikely to want to consider so many new laws. But do we really need them? Or are they just a symptom of having a political elite justifying their existence or reacting to media concerns? Would it really be a problem if we only had 24 new laws a year?

Alternatively, if all 105 Bills were presented to the public is it really a problem if not everyone votes on them: the people directly involved certainly would.