Talk:Open politics
 | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
The concepts of open politics and open source politics are mostly the same, therefore I suggest to merge the definitions. Guy West Gywst 12:07, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
Actually, the one who wrote about open politics made one mistake. Openness and transparency are two different terms. Inclusion of transparency into openness make pretty much confusion in terminology. I suppose the name created by Markus Schatten (top politics meaning transparent, open, public) is more articulatedand precise not giving possibility of making misakes.
That is an actual reason I gave up from term open politcs even though I wrote some articles about it several years ago.
Gordan Ponjavic Tiaktiv
Open institution democracy[edit]
A new form of democracy was proposed and publicly debated this month (August 2007). Two institutions were proposed: 1) open electoral system; and 2) open legislature. For details and references, see: Talk:Participatory_democracy#Open_institution_democracy.
I am wondering, should we describe this on Wikipedia? And where, exactly? --Michael Allan 15:46, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
This article was a mess[edit]
There were a lot of contradictions within this article about what "open politics" means. At its heart, the idea seems to be that of a community of people making political decisions together, using the internet. The Howard Dean campaign was not an example of open politics - there was a lot of online communication, but none of it was used to affect the political platform: I don't believe Dean ever asked his supporters what his stance should be on some political issue. DKosopedia, SourceWatch and Wikipedia aren't examples of open politics either - they produce information collaboratively, but not decisions. I tried to remove what I thought were irrelevant examples. I also tried to remove personal opinions (who says that wikis are good for "open politics" but blogs aren't?) some irrelevant stuff about Green Party lawsuits, and external links - some were broken, and some were about "open source politics" - if these two concepts are different (I don't know if they are), then those links don't belong here. Yaron K. (talk) 14:42, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
Merging with Open source governance[edit]
I think they should be merged, they pretty much cover most of the same material.--205.153.101.8 (talk) 17:57, 19 August 2008 (UTC)