3 ms·

Just wildly speculating here (with some wishful thinking thrown in): maybe the intent is to indirectly encourage non-technical audiences to use git-based, publi

by spangry 10y ago

Just wildly speculating here (with some wishful thinking thrown in): maybe the intent is to indirectly encourage non-technical audiences to use git-based, public version control for authoring public and frequently revised documents. For instance: imagine if federal legislation, and amendments to federal legislation, were published in this manner. You could examine diffs to see how passed (or proposed) amendments altered (or will alter) the law. You could even have a 'git blame' sort of feature that let you to see which members of congress voted for or against particular amendments. It would definitely aid political transparency, and make it easier for the public to participate in the legislative process. Eh, I guess that's mostly my wishful thinking...

jasonm23 10y ago
I see no reason for this being wishful thinking, other than the part where you'd need to be 30+ years in the future.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
fdgdasfadsf 10y ago
Wouldn't it be easier to add stronger version control (think track changes) to gui document editors?
- spangry 10y ago
  Maybe. But I guess my hidden objective here would be to open up the legislation making process to the public. At the moment (at least in Australia), the best we can do in this regard is 'exposure draft' consultation. Basically a draft of the legislation is put on some consultation website, and people can send in big long essays via email. The participants don't see each others' comments, it's just a 1-1 type relationship between the government department and the 'consultee'. I'd like to see infrastructure that would allow: (a) consultation participants to see and comment on each others' suggestions (think Greenpeace commenting on Shell's submission regarding fuel tax credits, and vice-versa); and (b) for participants to be able to make pull-requests, forcing the government department to answer in the positive of negative and give reasons. On the second point, under the current system they can simply put your submission through the shredder if they don't like your suggestions. By making it very public, government departments will feel strong pressure to acknowledge and respond in a reasoned way. Many government departments do a big song and dance about 'transparency'. I think this provides a concrete and actionable way to significantly increase this wonderful 'transparency' thing that I hear so much about.

by spangry 10y ago

jasonm23 10y ago

I see no reason for this being wishful thinking, other than the part where you'd need to be 30+ years in the future.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

fdgdasfadsf 10y ago

Wouldn't it be easier to add stronger version control (think track changes) to gui document editors?

spangry 10y ago
Maybe. But I guess my hidden objective here would be to open up the legislation making process to the public. At the moment (at least in Australia), the best we can do in this regard is 'exposure draft' consultation. Basically a draft of the legislation is put on some consultation website, and people can send in big long essays via email. The participants don't see each others' comments, it's just a 1-1 type relationship between the government department and the 'consultee'. I'd like to see infrastructure that would allow: (a) consultation participants to see and comment on each others' suggestions (think Greenpeace commenting on Shell's submission regarding fuel tax credits, and vice-versa); and (b) for participants to be able to make pull-requests, forcing the government department to answer in the positive of negative and give reasons. On the second point, under the current system they can simply put your submission through the shredder if they don't like your suggestions. By making it very public, government departments will feel strong pressure to acknowledge and respond in a reasoned way. Many government departments do a big song and dance about 'transparency'. I think this provides a concrete and actionable way to significantly increase this wonderful 'transparency' thing that I hear so much about.