4 ms·
The first step in changing something is being able to understand it, and the first step in understanding it is to have it organized. The organizational compone
by thwarted 16y ago
The first step in changing something is being able to understand it, and the first step in understanding it is to have it organized. The organizational component that is missing is, to put it in terms we at HN deal with everyday, to generate Changelogs and revision history (with attribution, down to the politician).
It would be nice to have all changes, including proposed changes, documented in a relatively easy to navigate format. Git, or any modern SCM, may qualify as a tool to provide that. Some of the most important metadata about proposed changes, even if they don't get included in the final, passed laws, would exist on branches; metadata like who proposed it and who signed off on it, who supports it. If anything, this would make The Daily Show's researchers' job easier.
While politics is 99% emotion, those emotions should include motivation, not frustration experienced early on when trying to grok the system. In a free society, the output of the governance should be accessible to all. One can debate if git is accessible, but it would definitely be a format that is more accessible, and maybe even more machine processable, than the current system.
- laws 16y agoPerhaps MediaWiki (or similar) would be a better choice. The (incomplete) U.S. Code is up on WikiSource (http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/United_States_Code http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/United_States_Code).
- jasonjei 16y agoI actually prefer source code revision system more than wiki. Wikis are chaos. People can still fork your code, and submit pull requests. Moderation is still required.