5 ms·

Hi everyone! Co-founder here / AMA. We've been working on this for coming up on 10 years. We launched on HN in August of 2014: https://news.ycombinator.com/ite

Hi everyone! Co-founder here / AMA. We've been working on this for coming up on 10 years. We launched on HN in August of 2014: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8228974 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8228974 Brief technical description: 1. produce a matrix of C comments (submitted by participants) * V votes (in 1, 0, -1 form for agree, disagree, pass). 2. Run dimensionality reduction (PCA) and clustering (K-means). 3. Find out which comments best differentiate clusters, show those to everyone https://compdemocracy.org/representative-comments/ https://compdemocracy.org/representative-comments/ 4. Identify comments in which the majority of every cluster is voting the same, way, show those to everyone: https://compdemocracy.org/group-informed-consensus/ https://compdemocracy.org/group-informed-consensus/ For more, we've recently published a paper describing the underlying methods: https://twitter.com/colinmegill/status/1445044310722822147 https://twitter.com/colinmegill/status/1445044310722822147 The 501c3 works around the world (USAID, UNDP, cities, countries) to help advance the usage of the method in deliberative democratic settings. Multiple cities (such as Amsterdam) now have their own deployments. We'd love to hear from you! If interested in the project or volunteering, please reach out to: hello@compdemocracy.org

kodah 5y ago
Does agree/disagree/pass really reflect what people think even in short form? A lot of voting may occur on a particularly emotional point, even though a voter may disagree with the rest of a statement. I've seen this on Reddit and here, and it's always made me wonder how we can actually capture the net of people's sentiments accurately.
- patcon 5y ago
  This is a great question. I've been using Polis for maybe 5 years. The "pass" is a catch-all for many things[1], including "rejecting a premise". It's non-obvious in the current interface, but there's room for coaching/learning how to engage with "complex/mixed" statements. For example, statements you encounter that conflict with your own emotional or factual sensibilities, which you're reluctant to respond to in a simple way (with agree/disagree). In this case, users can just "pass" on that statement, and immediately go below and submit a new "corrected" statement, or alternatively divide that one statement into a few separate ones, that can be reacted to more authentically. That way, you're not forced to weigh in on things you find to be leading statements or overly simplistic. And the pool of statements for everyone becomes ever-more-nuanced through these sorts of interactions, and the map of the sentimental landscape becomes more high-resolution :) [1]: https://github.com/compdemocracy/polis/discussions/774 https://github.com/compdemocracy/polis/discussions/774
  - Nathanba 5y ago
    I am a bit cynical about this system.. isn't this system naively gathering a temporary consensus that is constantly being changed by the raging media landscape? As soon as there is a media campaign about any topic whatsoever, all these temporary records of consensus will shift and change into completely different directions. How much value does a consensus system like this truly have in finding the truth of a subject matter versus being the equivalent of a slightly fancier strawpoll? I participated in one of these polis discussions and I have to admit that I found it interesting to see the different opinion clusters but at the same time I realize how little it means. Even the tonality or phrasing in a question could change the clusters completely. It's such a hard problem where I somehow tend to think that this system may be impossible to use for healthy politics but might be used as a tool by people with bad intentions to gather data about what the population superficially thinks and then be able to shape your media campaigns into changing people's opinions even more ruthlessly to what you want them to think.
    - colinmegill 5y ago
      Certainly a number of valid concerns here. Like any tool, polis is as good as its context, usage, data inputs. I can offer a specific case study with data, that deals with the discovery of the specific values of a specific population in the context of highly contested issue that has played out over a multi-decade period: A debrief: https://pep.org.nz/2020/12/01/doc-tries-to-restore-e-democracy/ https://pep.org.nz/2020/12/01/doc-tries-to-restore-e-democra... The professional facilitators who work at nation scale in NZ: https://pep.org.nz/ https://pep.org.nz/ The convo: https://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL1908/S00014/scoop-hivemind-protecting-and-restoring-biodiversity.htm https://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL1908/S00014/scoop-hivemind... The reporting: https://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO1911/S00063/biodiversity-hivemind-report-plenty-of-common-ground.htm https://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO1911/S00063/biodiversity-h... Raw data: https://github.com/compdemocracy/openData/tree/master/scoop-hivemind.biodiversity https://github.com/compdemocracy/openData/tree/master/scoop-... Direct link to PEP's report to the Ministry of Conservation: https://img.scoop.co.nz/media/pdfs/1911/Biodiversity_HiveMind_Final_Report_Scoop.pdf https://img.scoop.co.nz/media/pdfs/1911/Biodiversity_HiveMin... This is an ideal use case, but it is encouraging to us (and has motivated me over the course of the past decade) that given some combination of factors, there can be real progress, and while yes, it takes a bit of work, we do spend an enormous amount of time and money on worse outcomes than this. So, we can "save one starfish" https://raycenter.wp.drake.edu/2018/06/29/the-starfish-story/ https://raycenter.wp.drake.edu/2018/06/29/the-starfish-story... and put some lights on the horizon of other possible systems, should we inspire some millions, then tens of millions, then hundreds of millions to be spent on other political activities than driving wedges.
- colinmegill 5y ago
  Great question. You can see raw data from a conversation on biodiversity that took place in New Zealand in partnership with the Ministry of Conservation and hosted by an independent news organization here: https://github.com/compdemocracy/openData/tree/master/scoop-hivemind.biodiversity https://github.com/compdemocracy/openData/tree/master/scoop-... If you take a look at the comments file, you can judge whether the system has been successful at getting people to submit a single idea at a time for people to agree and disagree on. My assessment is: mostly yes, sometimes there are still multiple ideas in 140 characters. The system encourages the decomposition of ideas, so that we can identify which factors may be ignorable and which are significant to our purposes (consensus/disagreement/differentation).
DLA 5y ago
Why is it so hard to find the code? Links to open source and the license.
- wffurr 5y ago
  It’s straight from the Welcome page under “community”: https://compdemocracy.org/Welcome https://compdemocracy.org/Welcome https://github.com/compdemocracy/polis https://github.com/compdemocracy/polis GNU AGPL 3: https://github.com/compdemocracy/polis/blob/dev/LICENSE https://github.com/compdemocracy/polis/blob/dev/LICENSE There’s a doc on embedding it on a site, too, if that’s the end you’re interested in: https://compdemocracy.org/embedding-polis-on-your-web-property/ https://compdemocracy.org/embedding-polis-on-your-web-proper...
  - michael_j_ward 5y ago
    Just FYI, I also had trouble finding the github repo. In case it helps, the HN URL lands on the polis page [0], which itself has an `open-source` link[1]. Not finding the repo link on the open source page, I checked the About [2] page and the collection of links contained in the `footer` section. At that point, I gave up and searched `polis open source github` on duck duck go. [0] https://compdemocracy.org/Polis/ https://compdemocracy.org/Polis/ [1] https://compdemocracy.org/open-source/ https://compdemocracy.org/open-source/ [2] https://compdemocracy.org/about/ https://compdemocracy.org/about/
wffurr 5y ago
This is fascinating stuff and seems like a leverage point to apply technology to actually solve some of the big problems facing humanity, which at their core are political problems, not necessarily technological ones. Where do you need help the most with this project? Where do you see it going from here? Any interesting big trials or deployments in the works?
- colinmegill 5y ago
  Thanks, and great questions! 1. Where can I help? We have a range of volunteer opportunities for frontend and backend engineers (React/legacy Backbone.JS/D3), as well as data scientists (python / clojure). We also have a range of opportunities to work with organizations around the world that need but don't have the data science background necessary to properly implement the tool. There's manual work to do here that usually means getting on video with people in different time zones. We have some refactoring needs that are still in flight as we are still in a long transition from startup codebase to 'easy to deploy' generalized OSS repo. 2. Where is this going? We're excited to see people deploying this around the world, (a process that has been eased by community volunteers along with investment from governments). Because of Schrems II, OSS platforms have a degree of competitive advantage in Europe as those governments that need to own their own data, and there are also big pushes for deliberative democracy there. https://twitter.com/ICesnulaityte/status/1463426562783694857 https://twitter.com/ICesnulaityte/status/1463426562783694857 https://participedia.net/ https://participedia.net/ https://netdem.nl/en/projects/pol-is-in-nederland/ https://netdem.nl/en/projects/pol-is-in-nederland/ While we've worked around the world, bringing the methods / deliberative democracy to the United States is still something we're working out. The 501c3 is presently pursuing a strategy to 'compile' online deliberations to ballot propositions in places with small amounts of signatures needed, with the idea that if we take a known issue area (say opioids) + population sample + emergent discussion we'll discover a solution space, as the tech has elsewhere (like Taiwan), that won't then kick off the kind of adversarial advertising campaigns referendums usually attract. Potentially multiple zeros cheaper, and hopefully better outcomes. We're presently working on our first of these. Follow https://twitter.com/compdem https://twitter.com/compdem for updates. My writing about the future of democracy (working on a book) is presently focused on whether or not we can replace political parties in practice and compile a better high dimensional space to a legislature of independents. https://web.archive.org/web/20190629035125/https://civichall.org/civicist/beyond-flatland-machine-learning-end-two-party-binary/ https://web.archive.org/web/20190629035125/https://civichall... 3. Any big deployments? UNDP has just concluded what they think may have been the largest _online_ deliberative exercises in the developing world in history, in Bhutan, Pakistan, and East Timor. The full report will eventually be posted to https://twitter.com/compdem https://twitter.com/compdem
wussboy 5y ago
I am flipping through your FAQ, and it looks like the only way to log in is through Twitter or Facebook. Are there any plans for a more general OAuth implementation? I'd like users to be able to log in to my organization's website and then have that login work for Polis. Maybe only allowing FB and Twitter was an ironic choice (a consensus app requires divisive platforms to log in), but I would certainly like a third choice.
- patcon 5y ago
  (This is an outside project contributor speaking.) > it looks like the only way to log in is through Twitter or Facebook true :( > Are there any plans for a more general OAuth implementation? Some tickets open, but hasn't moved in awhile. Def an opportunity to contribute this! :) Context in the issue linked later. Right now, you can get third-party auth working in one of two ways: (1) contributing the feature to upstream Polis (slow, and lots of work) or (2) do auth in a custom "wrapper" app in which a Polis embed is used (quick, and no need to understand the messy Polis codebase). Sample of a wrapper app linked through here: https://github.com/compdemocracy/polis/issues/97#issuecomment-908398890 https://github.com/compdemocracy/polis/issues/97#issuecommen...
- colinmegill 5y ago
  Yes, there is an alternate method implemented, which those using the software do use: https://compdemocracy.org/xid/ https://compdemocracy.org/xid/ Full breakdown on identity: https://compdemocracy.org/Identity/ https://compdemocracy.org/Identity/ The motivation for the inclusion of social platforms was multifaceted, and included: 1. ideas of portable reputation (follower counts / verified / real id) 2. showing how others you follow on twitter voted, visually 3. showing known people, like politicians, voting relative to others. In the end, the platform is happy to know as little as possible. So, xid
michael_j_ward 5y ago
What the pol.is appears to do well is provide a topology of opposing viewpoints- identifying the main "teams", finding the contours of agreement and disagreement, "a technology for survey research." The HN URL describes something more ambitious: a technology for "Large Scale Discussions." This requires iterative steps where representatives from opposing viewpoints ask clarifying / challenging questions of other viewpoints, and collapsing "consensus-achieved" points as summary discussions in a knowledge base. I've long had `pol.is` as a tool to be used in a 21st century platform for discourse, so the HN title has me excited that you're taking steps in this direction already. Where should I look to understand "what happens next" after that initial sorting of viewpoints has occurred?
- wffurr 5y ago
  After the clustering, it then identifies points of agreement across clusters and surfaces those for voting to verify. That’s in the article on the linked site: “The algorithm then identifies “consensus statements" about which all the diverse clusters agree.” There’s also some notes about “group-informed consensus” on the algorithms page that might be interesting for you: https://compdemocracy.org/group-informed-consensus/ https://compdemocracy.org/group-informed-consensus/ And the “comment routing” algorithm: https://compdemocracy.org/comment-routing/ https://compdemocracy.org/comment-routing/

kodah 5y ago

Does agree/disagree/pass really reflect what people think even in short form? A lot of voting may occur on a particularly emotional point, even though a voter may disagree with the rest of a statement. I've seen this on Reddit and here, and it's always made me wonder how we can actually capture the net of people's sentiments accurately.

patcon 5y ago
This is a great question. I've been using Polis for maybe 5 years. The "pass" is a catch-all for many things[1], including "rejecting a premise". It's non-obvious in the current interface, but there's room for coaching/learning how to engage with "complex/mixed" statements. For example, statements you encounter that conflict with your own emotional or factual sensibilities, which you're reluctant to respond to in a simple way (with agree/disagree). In this case, users can just "pass" on that statement, and immediately go below and submit a new "corrected" statement, or alternatively divide that one statement into a few separate ones, that can be reacted to more authentically. That way, you're not forced to weigh in on things you find to be leading statements or overly simplistic. And the pool of statements for everyone becomes ever-more-nuanced through these sorts of interactions, and the map of the sentimental landscape becomes more high-resolution :) [1]: https://github.com/compdemocracy/polis/discussions/774 https://github.com/compdemocracy/polis/discussions/774
- Nathanba 5y ago
  I am a bit cynical about this system.. isn't this system naively gathering a temporary consensus that is constantly being changed by the raging media landscape? As soon as there is a media campaign about any topic whatsoever, all these temporary records of consensus will shift and change into completely different directions. How much value does a consensus system like this truly have in finding the truth of a subject matter versus being the equivalent of a slightly fancier strawpoll? I participated in one of these polis discussions and I have to admit that I found it interesting to see the different opinion clusters but at the same time I realize how little it means. Even the tonality or phrasing in a question could change the clusters completely. It's such a hard problem where I somehow tend to think that this system may be impossible to use for healthy politics but might be used as a tool by people with bad intentions to gather data about what the population superficially thinks and then be able to shape your media campaigns into changing people's opinions even more ruthlessly to what you want them to think.
  - colinmegill 5y ago
    Certainly a number of valid concerns here. Like any tool, polis is as good as its context, usage, data inputs. I can offer a specific case study with data, that deals with the discovery of the specific values of a specific population in the context of highly contested issue that has played out over a multi-decade period: A debrief: https://pep.org.nz/2020/12/01/doc-tries-to-restore-e-democracy/ https://pep.org.nz/2020/12/01/doc-tries-to-restore-e-democra... The professional facilitators who work at nation scale in NZ: https://pep.org.nz/ https://pep.org.nz/ The convo: https://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL1908/S00014/scoop-hivemind-protecting-and-restoring-biodiversity.htm https://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL1908/S00014/scoop-hivemind... The reporting: https://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO1911/S00063/biodiversity-hivemind-report-plenty-of-common-ground.htm https://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO1911/S00063/biodiversity-h... Raw data: https://github.com/compdemocracy/openData/tree/master/scoop-hivemind.biodiversity https://github.com/compdemocracy/openData/tree/master/scoop-... Direct link to PEP's report to the Ministry of Conservation: https://img.scoop.co.nz/media/pdfs/1911/Biodiversity_HiveMind_Final_Report_Scoop.pdf https://img.scoop.co.nz/media/pdfs/1911/Biodiversity_HiveMin... This is an ideal use case, but it is encouraging to us (and has motivated me over the course of the past decade) that given some combination of factors, there can be real progress, and while yes, it takes a bit of work, we do spend an enormous amount of time and money on worse outcomes than this. So, we can "save one starfish" https://raycenter.wp.drake.edu/2018/06/29/the-starfish-story/ https://raycenter.wp.drake.edu/2018/06/29/the-starfish-story... and put some lights on the horizon of other possible systems, should we inspire some millions, then tens of millions, then hundreds of millions to be spent on other political activities than driving wedges.
colinmegill 5y ago
Great question. You can see raw data from a conversation on biodiversity that took place in New Zealand in partnership with the Ministry of Conservation and hosted by an independent news organization here: https://github.com/compdemocracy/openData/tree/master/scoop-hivemind.biodiversity https://github.com/compdemocracy/openData/tree/master/scoop-... If you take a look at the comments file, you can judge whether the system has been successful at getting people to submit a single idea at a time for people to agree and disagree on. My assessment is: mostly yes, sometimes there are still multiple ideas in 140 characters. The system encourages the decomposition of ideas, so that we can identify which factors may be ignorable and which are significant to our purposes (consensus/disagreement/differentation).

DLA 5y ago

Why is it so hard to find the code? Links to open source and the license.

wffurr 5y ago
It’s straight from the Welcome page under “community”: https://compdemocracy.org/Welcome https://compdemocracy.org/Welcome https://github.com/compdemocracy/polis https://github.com/compdemocracy/polis GNU AGPL 3: https://github.com/compdemocracy/polis/blob/dev/LICENSE https://github.com/compdemocracy/polis/blob/dev/LICENSE There’s a doc on embedding it on a site, too, if that’s the end you’re interested in: https://compdemocracy.org/embedding-polis-on-your-web-property/ https://compdemocracy.org/embedding-polis-on-your-web-proper...
- michael_j_ward 5y ago
  Just FYI, I also had trouble finding the github repo. In case it helps, the HN URL lands on the polis page [0], which itself has an `open-source` link[1]. Not finding the repo link on the open source page, I checked the About [2] page and the collection of links contained in the `footer` section. At that point, I gave up and searched `polis open source github` on duck duck go. [0] https://compdemocracy.org/Polis/ https://compdemocracy.org/Polis/ [1] https://compdemocracy.org/open-source/ https://compdemocracy.org/open-source/ [2] https://compdemocracy.org/about/ https://compdemocracy.org/about/

wffurr 5y ago

This is fascinating stuff and seems like a leverage point to apply technology to actually solve some of the big problems facing humanity, which at their core are political problems, not necessarily technological ones. Where do you need help the most with this project? Where do you see it going from here? Any interesting big trials or deployments in the works?

colinmegill 5y ago
Thanks, and great questions! 1. Where can I help? We have a range of volunteer opportunities for frontend and backend engineers (React/legacy Backbone.JS/D3), as well as data scientists (python / clojure). We also have a range of opportunities to work with organizations around the world that need but don't have the data science background necessary to properly implement the tool. There's manual work to do here that usually means getting on video with people in different time zones. We have some refactoring needs that are still in flight as we are still in a long transition from startup codebase to 'easy to deploy' generalized OSS repo. 2. Where is this going? We're excited to see people deploying this around the world, (a process that has been eased by community volunteers along with investment from governments). Because of Schrems II, OSS platforms have a degree of competitive advantage in Europe as those governments that need to own their own data, and there are also big pushes for deliberative democracy there. https://twitter.com/ICesnulaityte/status/1463426562783694857 https://twitter.com/ICesnulaityte/status/1463426562783694857 https://participedia.net/ https://participedia.net/ https://netdem.nl/en/projects/pol-is-in-nederland/ https://netdem.nl/en/projects/pol-is-in-nederland/ While we've worked around the world, bringing the methods / deliberative democracy to the United States is still something we're working out. The 501c3 is presently pursuing a strategy to 'compile' online deliberations to ballot propositions in places with small amounts of signatures needed, with the idea that if we take a known issue area (say opioids) + population sample + emergent discussion we'll discover a solution space, as the tech has elsewhere (like Taiwan), that won't then kick off the kind of adversarial advertising campaigns referendums usually attract. Potentially multiple zeros cheaper, and hopefully better outcomes. We're presently working on our first of these. Follow https://twitter.com/compdem https://twitter.com/compdem for updates. My writing about the future of democracy (working on a book) is presently focused on whether or not we can replace political parties in practice and compile a better high dimensional space to a legislature of independents. https://web.archive.org/web/20190629035125/https://civichall.org/civicist/beyond-flatland-machine-learning-end-two-party-binary/ https://web.archive.org/web/20190629035125/https://civichall... 3. Any big deployments? UNDP has just concluded what they think may have been the largest _online_ deliberative exercises in the developing world in history, in Bhutan, Pakistan, and East Timor. The full report will eventually be posted to https://twitter.com/compdem https://twitter.com/compdem

wussboy 5y ago

I am flipping through your FAQ, and it looks like the only way to log in is through Twitter or Facebook. Are there any plans for a more general OAuth implementation? I'd like users to be able to log in to my organization's website and then have that login work for Polis. Maybe only allowing FB and Twitter was an ironic choice (a consensus app requires divisive platforms to log in), but I would certainly like a third choice.

patcon 5y ago
(This is an outside project contributor speaking.) > it looks like the only way to log in is through Twitter or Facebook true :( > Are there any plans for a more general OAuth implementation? Some tickets open, but hasn't moved in awhile. Def an opportunity to contribute this! :) Context in the issue linked later. Right now, you can get third-party auth working in one of two ways: (1) contributing the feature to upstream Polis (slow, and lots of work) or (2) do auth in a custom "wrapper" app in which a Polis embed is used (quick, and no need to understand the messy Polis codebase). Sample of a wrapper app linked through here: https://github.com/compdemocracy/polis/issues/97#issuecomment-908398890 https://github.com/compdemocracy/polis/issues/97#issuecommen...
colinmegill 5y ago
Yes, there is an alternate method implemented, which those using the software do use: https://compdemocracy.org/xid/ https://compdemocracy.org/xid/ Full breakdown on identity: https://compdemocracy.org/Identity/ https://compdemocracy.org/Identity/ The motivation for the inclusion of social platforms was multifaceted, and included: 1. ideas of portable reputation (follower counts / verified / real id) 2. showing how others you follow on twitter voted, visually 3. showing known people, like politicians, voting relative to others. In the end, the platform is happy to know as little as possible. So, xid

michael_j_ward 5y ago

What the pol.is appears to do well is provide a topology of opposing viewpoints- identifying the main "teams", finding the contours of agreement and disagreement, "a technology for survey research." The HN URL describes something more ambitious: a technology for "Large Scale Discussions." This requires iterative steps where representatives from opposing viewpoints ask clarifying / challenging questions of other viewpoints, and collapsing "consensus-achieved" points as summary discussions in a knowledge base. I've long had `pol.is` as a tool to be used in a 21st century platform for discourse, so the HN title has me excited that you're taking steps in this direction already. Where should I look to understand "what happens next" after that initial sorting of viewpoints has occurred?

wffurr 5y ago
After the clustering, it then identifies points of agreement across clusters and surfaces those for voting to verify. That’s in the article on the linked site: “The algorithm then identifies “consensus statements" about which all the diverse clusters agree.” There’s also some notes about “group-informed consensus” on the algorithms page that might be interesting for you: https://compdemocracy.org/group-informed-consensus/ https://compdemocracy.org/group-informed-consensus/ And the “comment routing” algorithm: https://compdemocracy.org/comment-routing/ https://compdemocracy.org/comment-routing/