3 ms·

I was the co-founder/CTO of ElectNext, and I think we had a great idea with good execution, but we found it extremely hard to monetize. Cyclical elections and l

I was the co-founder/CTO of ElectNext, and I think we had a great idea with good execution, but we found it extremely hard to monetize. Cyclical elections and lack of public interest are big challenges. I'd happily do more volunteer side projects to improve American government, but I'd be reluctant to try building another business around it. I suspect a successful Open Gov business is mostly about finding a market. The people spending money on elections are mostly campaigns, and open government is not necessarily in their interests. Being in this space seems like studying environmental science: sure you hope to protect the wilderness, but most potential employers want your help getting around the laws. (Pardon my cynicism.) I think Votizen is essentially lead gen for campaigns, and we felt a lot of pressure to go that way. Perhaps one market would be helping big-dollar contributors find the best people to fund? Even if you want to sell to campaigns, you should be aware that most election IT is partisan. Democrats have their solutions and Republicans have theirs. There is too much distrust for a vendor to service both sides. On another note, one of the great things about open government work is that it makes sense for all kinds of political viewpoints. My co-founder worked on the Hillary campaign, while I'm pretty libertarian. Most of the people I met doing Open Government work were very liberal, but in my opinion anything that increases government transparency and accountability is good for reining in state power. EDIT: added 2 paragraphs.

saraid216 14y ago
Reining in state power isn't an anti-liberal idea. Elections are a really bad example of governance, mostly because they're a minimalistic form. It's really not worthwhile, IMO, to go after anything to do with elections at all if you want to make money. Instead, try to figure out a way to loop the government into dealing with everyday problems. Tax-help companies, like H&R Block and TaxAct, are actually early instances of this: they're providing navigation of arcane bureaucratic nightmares. There is probably no end to the number of areas you could find to niche up and optimize a citizen's interface with their governments. I mean... I just find your comment odd. Elections are such a tiny slice... what problem are you even trying to solve, besides "how do I extract money from this process"?
- pjungwir 14y ago
  I think you're right about elections being too small, both from a business perspective and from an impact perspective. The problem we were trying to solve was that people vote blindly for most lower-ballot positions. We wanted to make it easy to vote intelligently all the way down your ballot, without researching each candidate individually. I guess it's understandable we couldn't find a way to support a business doing that.
  - saraid216 14y ago
    I wonder if it might be preferable to make it easier to put things on the ballot instead. You could look into the process for that and see if there's a way to humanize it or make it more transparent. I can't think of a way to business model that, though. Maybe a Kickstarter deal where people vote for inclusion via pledges and you take a cut? That doesn't sound like a great idea. Dunno.

saraid216 14y ago

Reining in state power isn't an anti-liberal idea. Elections are a really bad example of governance, mostly because they're a minimalistic form. It's really not worthwhile, IMO, to go after anything to do with elections at all if you want to make money. Instead, try to figure out a way to loop the government into dealing with everyday problems. Tax-help companies, like H&R Block and TaxAct, are actually early instances of this: they're providing navigation of arcane bureaucratic nightmares. There is probably no end to the number of areas you could find to niche up and optimize a citizen's interface with their governments. I mean... I just find your comment odd. Elections are such a tiny slice... what problem are you even trying to solve, besides "how do I extract money from this process"?

pjungwir 14y ago
I think you're right about elections being too small, both from a business perspective and from an impact perspective. The problem we were trying to solve was that people vote blindly for most lower-ballot positions. We wanted to make it easy to vote intelligently all the way down your ballot, without researching each candidate individually. I guess it's understandable we couldn't find a way to support a business doing that.
- saraid216 14y ago
  I wonder if it might be preferable to make it easier to put things on the ballot instead. You could look into the process for that and see if there's a way to humanize it or make it more transparent. I can't think of a way to business model that, though. Maybe a Kickstarter deal where people vote for inclusion via pledges and you take a cut? That doesn't sound like a great idea. Dunno.