Identity
Filter
Visitors
(1) (0) (0) (0) (0) (1) (0) (0) (0) (0) (0) (0) (0) (0) (0) (0) (0) (0) (61) (0) (0) (0)Subscribers
(0) (0)
Highest posts
- 03/11 16:21 +3 Hidden posts
- 30/04 03:58 +2 Re: Hidden posts
- 28/04 23:38 +2 Re: Hidden posts
- 25/04 10:31 +2 Re: Hidden posts
- 25/04 01:20 +2 Re: Hidden posts
- 23/04 01:43 +2 Re: Hidden posts
- 03/11 16:02 +2 Initial post rating
- 02/11 13:25 +2 Re: Features request
- 01/02 01:04 +1 Re: Different criteria for voting
- 17/05 21:59 +1 Re: Features request
Latest posts
- 28/09 23:26 +0 Re: Different criteria for voting
- 01/02 01:04 +1 Re: Different criteria for voting
- 17/05 21:59 +1 Re: Features request
- 16/05 05:48 +1 Re: Features request
- 30/04 09:34 +1 Re: Hidden posts
- 30/04 03:58 +2 Re: Hidden posts
- 30/04 03:52 +1 Re: Hidden posts
- 28/04 23:38 +2 Re: Hidden posts
- 25/04 10:31 +2 Re: Hidden posts
- 25/04 09:43 +1 Re: Hidden posts
Links
Blogs
Democracy
Search
Parlement
-
10/10/06 17:22
Features request
Put into here all the features requests. I think this might be useful!
+3
-
10/10/06 17:32
Different criteria for voting
Hi.
I think that it would be very smart if we would add the possibility to choose different criteria for voting (example: on topic, funny, smart, beautiful etc) on each message.So, let’s suppose, if there’s someone writing jokes in the pages where there’s a serious discussion about something, we may give his messages a minus for the on-topicness, but maybe a plus if it is funny… so if someone wants to read something funny he can, but he can still avoid what he has no interest in (off-topic, example), every time he wants.
Thank you, and best compliments for you job!
Dario-Shanghai
+1
-
Don’t know where to publish this. Here is a Constitutional Format patterened after the US Constitution. Note the assigned and limited powers, process of validating legislation, Federal, State and Community powers and rights.
Good Constitution Site http://www.archives.gov/national-archives-experience/charters/constitution_transcript.html Wikipedia US Cons. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Constitution#Preamble The Enumerated Powers Act, H.R. 2458, is a proposed law that would require all bills introduced in the U.S. Congress include a statement setting forth the specific constitutional authority under which the law is being enacted.At the beginning of the 105th Congress, the House of Representatives incorporated the substantive requirement of the Enumerated Powers Act into the House rules. Contents
• Preamble
• Article 1 – The Legislative Branch
o Section 1 – The Legislature
o Section 2 – The House
o Section 3 – The Senate
o Section 4 – Elections, Meetings
o Section 5 – Membership, Rules, Journals, Adjournment o Section 6 – Compensation
o Section 7 – Revenue Bills, Legislative Process, Presidential Veto o Section 8 – Powers of Congress
o Section 9 – Limits on Congress
o Section 10 – Powers Prohibited of States
• Article 2 – The Executive Branch
o Section 1 – The President
o Section 2 – Civilian Power over Military, Cabinet, Pardon Power, Appointments o Section 3 – State of the Union, Convening Congress o Section 4 – Disqualification
• Article 3 – The Judicial Branch
o Section 1 – Judicial Powers
o Section 2 – Trial by Jury, Original Jurisdiction, Jury Trials o Section 3 – Treason
• Article 4 – The States
o Section 1 – Each State to Honor All Others
o Section 2 – State Citizens, Extradition
o Section 3 – New States
o Section 4 – Republican Government
• Article 5 – Amendment
• Article 6 – Debts, Supremacy, Oaths
• Article 7 – Ratification
+1
-
0
-1
-
+1
-1
-
Don’t know where to publish this. Here is a Constitutional Format patterened after the US Constitution. Note the assigned and limited powers, process of validating legislation, Federal, State and Community powers and rights.
The Enumerated Powers Act, H.R. 2458, is a proposed law that would require all bills introduced in the U.S. Congress include a statement setting forth the specific constitutional authority under which the law is being enacted.At the beginning of the 105th Congress, the House of Representatives incorporated the substantive requirement of the Enumerated Powers Act into the House rules.
Contents
- Preamble
- Article 1 – The Legislative Branch
- Section 1 – The Legislature
- Section 2 – The House
- Section 3 – The Senate
- Section 4 – Elections, Meetings
- Section 5 – Membership, Rules, Journals, Adjournment
- Section 6 – Compensation
- Section 7 – Revenue Bills, Legislative Process, Presidential Veto
- Section 8 – Powers of Congress
- Section 9 – Limits on Congress
- Section 10 – Powers Prohibited of States
- Article 2 – The Executive Branch
- Section 1 – The President
- Section 2 – Civilian Power over Military, Cabinet, Pardon Power, Appointments
- Section 3 – State of the Union, Convening Congress
- Section 4 – Disqualification
- Article 3 – The Judicial Branch
- Section 1 – Judicial Powers
- Section 2 – Trial by Jury, Original Jurisdiction, Jury Trials
- Section 3 – Treason
- Article 4 – The States
- Section 1 – Each State to Honor All Others
- Section 2 – State Citizens, Extradition
- Section 3 – New States
- Section 4 – Republican Government
- Article 5 – Amendment
- Article 6 – Debts, Supremacy, Oaths
- Article 7 – Ratification
+1
-
0
-
+1
-1
-
Small things:
Could there be a remember me option on parlement for login pass?
Also in terms of length of pages, would there be a way to collapse information more, at least on the front page, to give a better view of what’s being discussed? (guess this goes back to tagging and categorizing)
In rating the posts, since if I have a filter set at +2 it will make me miss mechanically all new posts (by default at +1), would there be a way that a post by someone starts of with a score which is a weighed average of their previous scores (to accentuate the best and worst scores weight in the calculation of the average).
And I emailed you about this, but I was wondering why so many lines of post appear where there is only a score, ie +1 or other, is it that people actually propose a post with only this in the body, or is it that this is the way a click on the + button is shown? Could we get rid of the clutter?
Serge
+2
-
03/11/06 16:21
Hidden posts
> And I emailed you about this, but I was wondering why so many lines of post > appear where there is only a score, ie +1 or other, is it that people actually > propose a post with only this in the body, or is it that this is the way a > click on the + button is shown? Could we get rid of the clutter?
That’s normal. Each vote is in fact a post. Thus you can actually vote in your posts.
+1 <= here I just voted on what you said!!!
And this is an important feature, because each server can act as a node in a P2P net. The communication protocol being mails.
Trouble is, all those posts can clutter the screen.
I’m trying to change it, to make it so that a hidden post will not appear as a full line, but maybe as a dot (which you could click to open it). I don’t yet know how, css will tell me what I can do easily :)
Maybe hidden posts should just be that, hidden. No dot, no line. That would be easier to do.
Maybe posts with a score under 0 should be hidden. There is still the possibility to see them, but only if you choose not to filter at all.
What do you think?
What about sub posts with a good score. What happens if one of their parent is hidden?
+3
-
I still cannot see any test on the “latest posts” line. I went back to this one (03 11 06 and can read the test fine. The “latest posts” I cannot read to even evaluate how to vote on them. ??? Thanks, Bruce
+2
-
Hello hello bruce
As you know, it is possible to vote by mail. But the sent mail is not very interesting to many people, it’s mostly a way to agree or disagree with something, to make it more or less visible to the other users. But the content itself is not of huge value to many.
So by default, when a user posts a message containing only a vote, that user automatically votes negatively on it. This is to clean up the interface.
To nonetheless view all those texts (the one only containing votes and all those in the negative), you can remove your filter completely.
In the right hand side “filter” box, there is a selection between a list of numbers, choose the very top element, the one without any value, just before 0.
You are not filtering anything anymore.
But it is true that when going to see an element, even if its level is below one’s filter, we should probably see its content. So I just changed that accordingly.
What label should be used for not filtering?
+1
On Mon, Apr 23, 2007 at 01:43:26AM +0200, eggy wrote:
> I still cannot see any test on the “latest posts” line. I went back to this one > (03 11 06 and can read the test fine. The “latest posts” I cannot read to even > evaluate how to vote on them. ??? Thanks, Bruce
+1
-
I did not realize the no filter choice.
I have now made a non filter so will see how this works Bruce
+1
-
The no filter label is definitely not explicit. Any value coming to your mind about it? “no filter” is a bit long, but maybe it should be thus.
Without a filter, you are going to see “everything”, This could become too many. I recommend using email filters, so that in case of volume, they at least are moved automatically to a dedicated folder.
+1
On Mon, Apr 23, 2007 at 09:00:27AM +0200, eggy wrote:
> I did not realize the no filter choice. I have now made a non filter so will > see how this works Bruce
+1
-
I tried no filter, seemed ok but not that many posts just yet. I now filtered +1 and could see text as I wanted until I got to this one: http://leparlement.org/Re_Parlement_47
I now assume this is a “vote” with no text. However it is rated1 so why do I see it if I have a +1 filter? I suspect that is the actual vote? What do the filter numbers mean +1, +2 etc.-yet— to explain it. I also am hampered by vocabulary as I do not understand some programer lingo, and not even enough to ask questions some times. We are making progress though. What a user needs is to know if they get to a “blank” page, it is supposed to be blank. The “vote” page has nothing on it except perhaps a -1 or such.
This needs to be explained in FAQ but I do not understand -The blank vote pages seem to be the root of my confusion. Could they be filtered out? Or labeled as vote page so not looking for text on them?
Bruce
+2
-
+1
I have in fact made a change.
Now if you go to a post, even if it’s just a vote, it’s displayed without filtering.
Because if you click on an element, you most certainly want to see it.
Its sub elements are filtered as usual. That is, you choose a filter, all elements whose vote result is strictly below are hidden from view.
And yes, maybe the votes shouldn’t be displayed at all. What do you think?
+1
-
Thanks, this is just getting better and better !!
Bruce
+2
-
+1
I’ve done another change to the interface. Now filtered elements don’t appear as a full line by itself. But as an orange >. It’s clickable, to browse it if wished.
It’s done to help the interface, to ease it. What do you think, does it work?
+2
-
I can not see a change. I still have filter box the same. Perhaps I do not understand how to access the change?
+1
-
Ahhh, I found a “vote” > and clicked it to see it was a vote. Very good! Much less confusing.
+2
-
+1
Cool
And now, the “who is connected” box :)
+1
-
-
Ahhh, I found a “vote” > and clicked it to see it was a vote. Very good! Much less confusing.
-
+1
-1
-
-
-
-
-
-
0
-1
-
-
-
-
+1
-1
-
+1
-1
-
-
03/11/06 16:21
-
10/10/06 17:32