Sehr geehrte Frau Edelmann, ist es möglich, dass wir bis Montag noch ein Papier einreichen? Es geht um eine Zusammenfassung des Standes elektronischer Partizipation in Deutschland auf der Basis einer Studie, die kürzlich im Auftrag des Bundesministerium des Innern fertiggestellt wurde: Stärken, Schwächen und Handlungsempfehlungen. Beste Grüße aus Bonn, Oliver Märker Noella Edelmann schrieb:
Dear friends and colleagues, please find attached the Call for the Workshop "Interoperability Infrastructures for European Public Administrations" that is being organized in this year's eChallenges Conference in Stockholm, late October. I will be glad to host you, either as presenters or as participants. Best Regards Yannis Charalabidis
Craig Burton wrote: > The specification of the Smartocracy implementation for Open Social is > now done and the development work runs to the end of June... But you are unable to post the spec? Will you be able to show running code in June? (Or will that also be under wraps, until the production release?) > ... It will be > for political questions, especially "hard" political questions as we are > using the "proxy" method in Rodriquez' paper. We judged this one to be > the simplest one to try out with an existing network. What do you mean, Craig, by an "existing network"? Do you mean that Google's servers will host your application (as OpenSocial allows)? > We are most interested to see if an existing network can be used and if > it will illustrate Smartocracy's "emergent representative" phenomenon, > if I can call it that. This is where ballots have carefully chosen tags > and voters create proxies on upcoming elections via tags. Voters vote > in their domain of expertise and delegate their votes in other domains > to people they know who have some ideas. Network effects hopefully form > and some "experts" get lots of proxies. Something like an oracle, then? Who will frame the hard political questions, to put before it? Could we ask it questions like: How ought we to amend the zoning bylaws, consistent with the new park on Cleaver Street? What ought to be the City's plan for public transportation? Who ought to be Mayor? BTW, if anyone is planning to experiment with voting mechanisms (in a real-life, political context), you might wish to consider using Votorola, as your development base. I've sketched some notes on this here (sorry it is somewhat rough, but please ask if you need more info): http://zelea.com/project/votorola/a/design.xht#extended-electoral-services Basically, you would focus on coding the actual voting mechanism, and the electoral rules, without worrying too much about the voter register, and the basic UI framework (Web, email, etc.) - provided you are content with the default implementations of these, that are built into Votorola (otherwise, they too are pluggable). My own voting mechanism (delegate cascade + recombinant text) should be ready for beta in June. The exact timing of the trials will depend on the system administrators in each local jurisdiction, where the trials will be conducted. (But we already have running code online, which you can try out.) http://zelea.com/project/votorola/home.xht
yav buna gitmeye bir bursam ben? ah ah 2008/5/6 Noella Edelmann <<email obscured>>:
Call for papers: extended deadline for submissions is 15. May - please forward to your colleagues, students, etc! EDem2008 - Conference for E-Democracy 29-30 September 2008 Danube University Krems, Austria www.donau-uni.ac.at/edem With Keynote Speakers: Steven Clift (Ashoka Fellow, E-Democracy.Org, USA) Ann Macintosh (Professor Digital Governance, University of Leeds, UK) Peter Parycek (Head of the Center for E-Government, Danube University Krems, A) Matt Poelmans (Director, Citizenlink, Den Hague, NL) *To what extent can E-Democracy support and enrich our democracy? *What and where are the interfaces, what methods can be used to integrate E-participation in present politics public administration processes? *How can we ensure that the greatest number of people are reached and are able to use the means of participation? *How can the modern media support political education? *How can the Internet increase participation in political discussion? *What are the limitations and the risks of E-Democracy? We are looking for contributions on all areas and levels of electronic democracy and participation systems, precedence will be given to those contributions which include national and/or international experiences. Concrete projects can also be submitted, and, if accepted, would be presented as examples of *hands-on* demonstrations of E-Democracy and E-Participation. Call for Papers and further information: www.donau-uni.ac.at/edem Contact: <email obscured> I look forward to hearing from you, Kind regards Noella Edelmann Noella Edelmann BA, MSc, MAS Academic Staff Research Course Director Executive MBA in ICT Centre for E-Government Danube University Krems Dr.-Karl-Dorrek-Strasse 30 3500 Krems Austria Tel.: +43 2732 893 2303 E-Mail: <email obscured> http://www.donau-uni.ac.at/egov ( http://www.donau-uni.ac.at/egov )
This was indeed really interesting. Here's my post on it (video etc in post http://paulcanning.blogspot.com/2008/04/kids-are-alllrreight.html) Social Citizens' is a really fascinating paper from the Social Citizens project, sponsored by the Case Foundation. It's about young people (Millennials) and how they are using online tools to connect to, initiate and run causes the flip-side of the MSMs obsession with the negatives about the young and the Internet: In October 2007, Thomas Friedman wrote in The New York Times that young people are members of Generation Q. He meant Q for quiet, and inactive, on the important social questions of the day. The celebrated American globalist could not have been more wrong. This generation is making noise, whether adults can hear it or not. You may have read echoes of this attitude in the tabloids (the 'hoodie' image above features prominently in the Daily Express). The authors are very impressed with the scale and depth of youth engagement with change using the new technology in what they report on - just think of their impact on corporate behaviour. They go so far to compare them to the 'greatest generation' who fought WW2, and I don't think that's over the top given what we face with climate change: One example of Millennials online activism is Causes on Facebook. In the spring of 2007, Project Agape posted its Causes application on Facebook. Within six months, more than 30,000 Causes were created on the social networking site, supporting over 12,000 existing nonprofit organizations. A brief survey of Causes on Facebook reveals an array of mainstream, apple-pie efforts, typical of Millennial activism. They are more practical than poetic, more passionate and less ideological in their activism efforts. Few could argue with the worthiness of helping orphans in China, trying to find a cure for AIDS and ALS, eradicating breast cancer, and helping underprivileged children learn to read. However, the Causes application is different from traditional approaches because users are drawn to the cause first, then the institution (or group of volunteers if no formal institution exists). Joe Green, CEO of Causes on Face-book, describes the network interaction for causes this way: There could be 1,000 causes aiming to help SaveDarfur.org with lots of different leaders and networks and lots of people reaching out in many ways. The paper documents a stack of other examples; 'Invisible Children' is one, which grew from four young guys' visit to Northern Uganda. Preview: [55' Movie on Google. 'In the spring of 2003, three young Americans traveled to Africa in search of such as story. What they found was a tragedy that disgusted and inspired them. A story where children are weapons and children are the victims. The "Invisible Children: rough cut" film exposes the effects of a 20 year-long war on the children of Northern Uganda. These children live in fear of abduction by rebel soldiers, and are being forced to fight as a part of violent army. This wonderfully reckless documentary is fast paced, with an MTV beat, and is something truly unique. To see Africa through young eyes is humorous and heart breaking, quick and informative - all in the very same breath. See this film, you will be forever changed.'] This is one of the most moving documentaries I've seen in years. The authors see a flip side though, and speculate that this mightn't all be good: Specic policy outcomes are not a signicant component for most Millennial activist efforts. Social capital is the new commerce and the end result of many cause-related efforts spearheaded by young people. Social action is a safe place to express a personal identity, and is much safer and easier than in the political arena with its inherent conict and most often less-than-lofty outcomes. Danah Boyd (UofC Berkeley) explains, We are living in a time of the elongation of childhood where kids are kept out of public life and only glimpse it through the mass media. Their lives are so heavily regulated and controlled, they dont see a public world outside of the celebritization of political candidates. Is it possible to envision a very large generation of citizens who lead their lives at a great distance from government, even lives infused with causes, volunteering and a hopeful outlook about the world. Can government really be irrelevant to their lives, and, if so, is this a good thing for society? Is it important that young people are engaged in public policy advocacy? Is our tendency to connect only with like-minded people using our on line and on land social networks a good thing for activism or a critical bottleneck to the effective scaling for causes? Are social change institutions critical to the future of Social Citizens and their causes or are they becoming old-century anachronisms of top-down hierarchies that cant survive much longer? What draws their involvement? Conflicts like Israel/Palestine get less attention from this group as they're less clear, more grey, than ones like Darfur. But one thing the authors don't do in discussing negative disengagement from 'government' is make the connections with the Obama campaign perhaps because it's partisan or just because the campaign's happening now which exists because of a/the Internet and b/the same sort of new bottom-up/shared/devolved organisations which young people are establishing. This has seen an enormous increase in active political engagement by young people - and voting - though what will happen to 'the movement' once he's elected President is a moot point. What they do have is some ideas: Political participation can and should be more meaningful than political campaigns, such as the possibility of careers in public service and policymaking, including serving on committees and task forces for local government efforts. A major cautionary note for anyone interested in engaging young people in conversations about the role of government and policy issues is that these conversations must be authentic and spin-free, or youth will quickly tune out. Now there's a big take-away for the oldies. And don't think this is just America. Most UK young people use social networks. NB: scribd embed script is not Blogger friendly!
Looks interesting! - Steve Subject: Social Citizens Paper Released Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2008 20:32:41 -0400 From: Allison Fine <<email obscured>> Hi, I thought you'd be interested in a paper that I wrote for the Case Foundation that was released this week. Late last year, Kari Dunn and Ben Binswanger of The Case Foundation asked me to write a paper for the Foundation about the emergence of Millennials, 15-29 year olds, as activists. They wanted to know more about how these young people are using all of their widgets and gadgets for causes. We decided to go beyond a simply litany of the ways that young people are using blogs, social networks, and videos to share information about their favorite causes. We wanted to go a step further and ask harder “so what” questions. What does it mean to Millennials to have the ability to become an advocate for their cause instantly, broadly, inexpensively, and what does their ability to do so mean for the rest of us? I found young people to be very idealistic, marinating in causes, alienated from government and public policy -- in short, Social Citizens. So, here's <http://blog.socialcitizens.org/paper/> the paper, and here's <http://blog.socialcitizens.org/> the accompanying blog we've set up to host the conversation about Millennials as activists. I think you'll enjoy the paper and discussion, I'm looking forward to hearing what you think. And feel free to share it with others, and/or blog about it! Best wishes, Allison Senior Fellow Demos: A Network of Ideas and Action 914.674.9568 To read more about my work and my book, Momentum: Igniting Social Change in the Connected Age, visit my website at http://www.allisonfine.com
Subject: [DEMO-net] GDN call for papers
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2008 09:52:49 +0200
From: Jeremy Rose <<email obscured>>
To: <<email obscured>>
**
Call for Papers
Demo-net Session on
e-Participation: A GDN perspective
which will be held within the Joint International Conference on
Group Decision and Negotiation
/Coimbra, Portugal, June 17-20, 2008/
*Organiser:* Jesus Rios
Department of Computer Science, Aalborg University, Denmark
* *
In many parts of the world there is an increasing demand for
participation in public policy making. However, little use of decision
support technologies is employed. Nowadays, the growing availability of
ICTs is making possible that group decision support tools can be
deployed on the web or PDAs to incorporate citizens and stakeholders in
such decisions. This session focuses on contributions aim at designing
tools and methodologies based on decision analysis principles to support
participatory decision processes in political issues.
This session will touch from a GDN perspective some of the key issues in
e-participation: e-voting, e-participatory budgeting, facilitating
participation with simpler systems and a comparison of participatory and
e-participatory processes.
Themes and topics of relevance include:
Designing of participatory decision processes using a GDN
perspective
Compared studies on participatory instruments
Web based systems to support public in societal decision making
Evaluation of participatory processes and support tools in
e-democracy
Experimental and field Studies
E-Democracy.Org just found out about this ... but in case anyone in your institution is planning to apply, we might be able to sign on as partners to help you out. Steven Clift E-Democracy.Org Learn and Serve America College Student Social Media Initiative - $2.3M Applications due May 7, 2008 Learn and Serve America announces approximately $2.3 million for grants to facilitate better engagement of college students in service through social media. Some examples of social media include: social networking (i.e. Facebook, MySpace, Ning, or integrating social networking capacity into existing sites), wikis, podcasts, blogs, RSS feeds, mashups, social bookmarking, widgets, etc. Successful applicants must demonstrate how their program can use these tools to engage increased numbers of college students, especially in partnership with other nonprofit or for-profit entities. The Corporation will make one-time awards of approximately $100,000 to $750,000 to an estimated twelve eligible applicants for a project period of up to three years. While all applicants can build in funds for subgrants as part of their program model, the Corporation expects to fund at least one partnership dedicated primarily to disbursing small subgrants (under $10,000 each) to seed student-driven projects. Eligible applicants include higher education partnerships, defined as one or more public or private nonprofit organizations, or public agencies, including States, and one or more institutions of higher education. Funding will go to approximately 12 institutions or organizations. http://www.learnandserve.gov/for_organizations/funding/nofa_detail.asp?tbl_nofa_id=56
Craig Burton wrote: > The specification of the Smartocracy implementation for Open Social is > now done and the development work runs to the end of June. It will be > for political questions, especially "hard" political questions... interesting... are you able to post the spec?
Michael, The specification of the Smartocracy implementation for Open Social is now done and the development work runs to the end of June. It will be for political questions, especially "hard" political questions as we are using the "proxy" method in Rodriquez' paper. We judged this one to be the simplest one to try out with an existing network. We are most interested to see if an existing network can be used and if it will illustrate Smartocracy's "emergent representative" phenomenon, if I can call it that. This is where ballots have carefully chosen tags and voters create proxies on upcoming elections via tags. Voters vote in their domain of expertise and delegate their votes in other domains to people they know who have some ideas. Network effects hopefully form and some "experts" get lots of proxies. Kind regards, Craig.
*** Democracies Online Newswire - http://DoWire.Org *** To access links, see Steven Clift's blog: http://dowire.org/notes/?p=404 Post: CFP - EDem2008 - Conference for E-Democracy - Austria 29-30 Sep 2008 - Submissions May 15 Join me in Austria next September at the EDem2008 conference. In addition to speaking, I hope to use this as an opportunity to have an informal conversation with researchers interested helping design a proposal for a multi-city European comparative research project on *citizen-based* local e-democracy projects (including a mix of community and neighbourhood Issue Forums with E-Democracy.Org). Steven Clift E-Democracy.Org and DoWire.Org EDem2008 � Conference for E-Democracy http://www.donau-uni.ac.at/edem Krems (Austria), 29-30 September 2008 "E-Democracy" has managed the jump from trendy "e-word? to reality. Following recommendations issued by the European Council, studies and projects conducted in Europe are starting to provide initial findings and results. There are a number of E-Democracy applications, ranging from providing information to discussion, deliberation, decision-making and voting, thus encompassing the entire democratic process. The technical devices have become a means to an end, and there are other questions that now need to be raised and answered: * To what extent can E-Democracy support and enrich our democracy? * What and where are the interfaces, what methods can be used to integrate E-participation in present politics public administration processes? * How can we ensure that the greatest number of people are reached and are able to use the means of participation? * How can the modern media support political education? * How can the Internet increase participation in political discussion? * What are the limitations and the risks of E-Democracy? The EDem2008 conference presents the opportunity to look into these questions and discuss the answers. During the conference experiences will be collected, examples good and bad practice analysed, the State-of-the-Art and future scenarios will be presented and discussed. We are looking for contributions on all areas and levels of electronic democracy and participation systems, precedence will be given to those contributions which include national and/or international experiences. Concrete projects can also be submitted, and, if accepted, would be presented as examples of "hands-on? demonstrations of E-Democracy and E-Participation. Papers and projects can be submitted in English or German, the tracks in German and English language will be held parallel. We invite individuals from academic and practical backgrounds as well as public administration offices, public bodies, NGOs, education institutions and independent organisations, to submit their contributions. Important dates 15. May 2008 Deadline for paper submission (max. 10 pages) 15. May 2008 Deadline for project presentations (if the project is not submitted with a paper please provide 2-3 pages describing the project and the a link) 30. May 2008 Notification of acceptance/rejection 15. June 2008 Final (camera-ready) papers submission 29-30. September 2008 Conference: Danube University Krems, Austria Submission Please submit your paper in a pdf or MS Word format to: <email obscured> or <email obscured> Reviewing is applied for all the materials submitted. All papers are refereed through a ?double blind� peer review process. Please submit the text of the paper, including text, acknowledgments, references and notes, tables, figure captions, figures, but with the names of authors or their biographical notes on a separate page. Please use the following format for accepted papers: http://www.ocg.at/publikationen/books/files/paper2.dot If your paper is accepted, please fill out the author agreement: http://www.ocg.at/publikationen/books/files/copyright.pdf Cost: EUR 95,- including proceedings Further information: http://www.donau-uni.ac.at/edem In cooperation with the Vienna University of Economics and Business Administration. The Proceedings will be published by the OCG (�sterreichische Computer Gesellschaft) Keynote Speakers Steven Clift (Ashoka Fellow, E-Democracy.Org, USA) Ann Macintosh (Professor of Digital Governance, University of Leeds, UK) Matt Poelmans (Director, Citizenlink, The Hague, NL) Conference Chairs Peter Parycek (Danube University Krems) Alexander Prosser (Vienna University of Economics, A) Programme Committee Georg Aichholzer (Austrian Academy of Sciences � Institute of Technology Assessment, A) Sylvia Archmann (European Institute of Public Administration EIPA) Lasse Berntzen (Vestfold University College, NOR) Thomas Buchsbaum (Austrian Foreign Ministry, A) G�nther Burkert-Dottolo (Austrian Federal Ministry of Science and Research, A) Alessandro de Carlo (Austrian Federal Economic Chamber, A) Matjaz Gams (Jozef Stefan Institute, University of Ljubljana, SLO) Thomas Gordon (Fraunhofer Institute for Open Communication Systems, D) Marijan Gusev (Cyril and Methodius University Skopje, FYROM) Bozidar Klicek (University Zagreb, Faculty of Organization and Informatics Varazdin, HR) Zlatko Lagumdzija (University of Sarajevo, Management and Information Technology Centre, BiH) Ann Macintosh (University of Leeds, UK) �lle Madise (estnische Parlamentsdirektion, EST) Ursula Maier-Rabler (University of Salzburg, A) Josef Makolm (Federal Ministry of Finance, A) Peter Mambrey (Fraunhofer Institute for Applied Information Technology, D) Oliver M�rker (Zebralog, D) Veljko Milutinovic (University of Belgrade, Faculty for Computer Engineering ,SRB) Robert M�ller-T�r�k (INTECO, D) Arvo Ott (e-Governance Academy, EST) Rob Peters (ZENC, NL) Carl-Markus Piswanger (Austrian Federal Computing Centre, A) Guenther Schefbeck (Parlament, A) Erich Schweighofer (Universit�t Wien, A) Rita Trattnigg (Austrian Federal Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry, Environment and Water, A) Roland Traunm�ller (Universit�t Linz, A) Frank Wilson (Interaction Design, UK) Maria Wimmer (University of Koblenz, D) Melanie Volkamer (University Passau, D) Helle Zinner Henriksen (Copenhagen Business School, DK) *** Democracies Online Newswire - http://DoWire.Org *** To comment/for links: http://dowire.org/notes/?p=404 To network: http://groups.dowire.org Submit posts: http://dowire.org/submit
Andrea, Sorry for the slow response. I did not pose question #2 -- Steve did. But my answer is how I would analyze the E-RM situation. Best, peter
I've been following very close the case of Avery Doninger in Connecticut. Avery is a high school student who wrote a blog post criticizing the school administration, using language some consider vulgar or offensive. She was barred from running for re-election as class secretary as a result of the post and the case has ended up in the U.S. Federal Courts. One of the very important aspects about this is understanding how we view internet speech. The freedoms that high school students enjoy are significantly limited by various court decisions over recent years, with Bong Hits 4 Jesus as a recent example. One of the key issues is whether or not the speech is taking place on the school property or is likely to be brought into the school properly. The school district is essentially arguing that given the pervasiveness of the Internet, any speech online should be considered likely to be brought into the school property and should face the same limitations as speech expressed on the school property. Arguements where heard in the U.S. Second Circuit recently, and you can read my commments about it on my blog, http://www.orient-lodge.com/node/2843 While it does not directly address whether or not the Internet is legally considered a "public forum", I believe it is related. In addition, I believe there have been some cases that look at it from different aspects of the internet, e.g. blog entries versus emails or IMs.
Peter, does the question #2 that you pose below refer to government e- rulemaking procedures? Andrea
1. In the U.S. context does anyone know if the courts have found the Internet to be a "public forum" like courts recognize public sidewalks or public parks as "places" historically recognized for free speech. I know of no cases, but it's unlikely that the "Internet" would be considered a forum, anymore than "the telephone" is a forum. The Internet is really a medium for information flow, and the hot policy topic these days is whether ISPs should be forced to act as "common carriers," like telephone companies, or whether they have some editorial control over what they transmit, like cable companies. (Recall also that the networks comprised in the Internet are not publicly owned resources, like the land on which parks and sidewalks are located.) Even if the Internet were conceived as a "place," like a sidewalk, it would be hard to argue that something invented by the government within the last thirty years as a vehicle for scientific communication would amount to a traditional space for free speech. * * * 2. I've noticed a number of government websites with policy statements attempting to establish that their websites are not "limited (or designated) public forums." I bumped into one federal government online consultation that declared a limited public forum online for X days. Does anyone know of research in this area? (Due to the power of "one-way" e-government, I can imagine citizens pushing for two-way "designated public forums" on government websites within the context of public meeting agenda items for example in my lifetime.) * * * Again, I know of no specific research -- except for a paper on which I am currently collaborating -- but I think that, absent express disclaimers, government consultation web sites may already qualify as "designated public forums." This does not make them free speech corners in the same way we think of Hyde Park; they can still be policed for subject matter relevance, and other norms appropriate to the purpose of the forum. What the designation would mean in a U.S. context is that the government could not limit speech in the forum according to viewpoint. Thus, for example, if New York City created an online consultation on public security issues, they could refuse to post comments about sports teams moving to New Jersey. They could not, however, decide to post comments in favor of more community policing, but refuse to post comments in opposition.
From: Noella Edelmann <<email obscured>> EDem2008 EDemocracy 2008 Conference 29-30. September 2008 Krems, Austria We are looking for contributions on all areas and levels of electronic democracy and participation systems: * To what extent can E-Democracy support and enrich our democracy? * What and where are the interfaces, what methods can be used to integrate E-participation in present politics public administration processes? * How can we ensure that the greatest number of people are reached and are able to use the means of participation? * How can the modern media support political education? * How can the Internet increase participation in political discussion? * What are the limitations and the risks of E-Democracy? The International EDem2008 conference will take place in Krems, Austria 29-30. September 2008. Please find attached the call for papers in English and German. Submission possible in English and German ! Further information is provided under: www.donau-uni.ac.at/egov Deadline for Papers: 15. April 2008 Registration online: www.donau-uni.ac.at/egov We look forward to receiving your contributions. Kind regards Noella Edelmann Noella Edelmann BA, MSc, MAS Academic Staff Research Course Director Executive MBA in ICT Centre for E-Government Danube University Krems Dr.-Karl-Dorrek-Strasse 30 3500 Krems Austria Tel.: +43 2732 893 2303 E-Mail: <email obscured> http://www.donau-uni.ac.at/egov ( http://www.donau-uni.ac.at/egov )
Subject: [Liftoff] Webcast: Online Consultation and Public Policy Making Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2008 11:03:02 +1300 (NZDT) From: Tim Erickson <<email obscured>> Reply-To: <email obscured> To: Liftoff - Issues Forums Builders <<email obscured>> Hello friends: Just wanted to pass along the word that there will be a live webcast of the entire "Online Consultation and Public Policy Making: Democracy, Identity, and New Media" symposia taking place tomorrow at the Moritz College of Law, Columbus, Ohio. My interest in this webcast, is that I'm on the agenda as the lunch time speaker, which may also mean that my presentation will be webcast as well (as if I needed the extra pressure of millions of online viewers tuning in to the symposia). :-) For more info about the symposia and how to join the webcast: http://www.is-journal.org/symposia.php I'll be talking about "Building Democracy Through Local Issues Forums." - - - - - - - - - - - Online Consultation and Public Policy Making: Democracy, Identity, and New Media March 14, 2008 | 8:15 a.m. - 4:30 p.m. | Barrister's Club| Moritz College of Law E-Goverance: The Internet now offers the world an unprecedented capacity to foster the sharing of information and to facilitate sustained, many-to-many communication. The networking of citizens with their governments, with each other, and with the organs of civil society has created unprecedented opportunities for popular engagement in the public sphere. To attend any part of this conference, please reserve your seat by contacting Adrienne Montalvo, Executive Editor, at <email obscured> by March 12, 2008. Please indicate whether you would like to reserve a lunch. The Symposim will feature researchers from Australia, England, France, Israel, Italy, Korea and Slovenia, as well as the United States, addressing a variety of e-democracy issues from a diverse interdisciplinary background and both theoretical and applied research. This is an active workshop for members of the International Working Group on Online Consultation and Public Policy Making, some presenting and others discussing the principal papers. Audience members, including students, are welcome to attend, but reservations must be made in advance. Principal presenters include: * Steven J. Balla, Associate Professor of Political Science, Public Policy and Public Administration, Elliott School of International Affairs, George Washington University * Patrizia Bertini, Independent Practitioner and Researcher, European Internet Accessibility Observatory * Andrew Chadwick, Head, Department of Politics and International Relations, and Founding Director, New Political Communication Unit, University of London * Sungsoo Hwang, Ph.D. candidate in Public Affairs, Graduate School of Public and International Affairs, University of Pittsburgh * Laurence Monnoyer-Smith, Associate Professor of Communication Sciences, University of Technology at Compiègne, France * Kerrie Oakes, Ph.D. candidate in Public Administration, Griffi th University, and former Policy Offi cer, Queensland eDemocracy Policy Team in Australia * Oren Perez, Senior Lecturer in the Faculty of Law, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan, Israel * Alicia Schatteman, Ph.D. candidate, School of Public Affairs and Administration, Rutgers University. Best wishes, Tim Erickson E-Democracy.Org Tim Erickson Hamline Midway Info about Tim Erickson: http://forums.e-democracy.org/contacts/timerickson This topic's messages may be viewed at: http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/48wvYUakkIM5bHNKtRppBl
A new online neighborhood forum is opening for my neighborhood of Standish Ericsson in Minneapolis. We are just starting a round of introductions after a period of online and in-person recruitment and new member priming. We currently have over 150 members, almost one household per block in an community with about 4,000 households and 10,000 people. My goal is 400 members (~10% of households in DAILY communication via the neighborhood forum) by the end of the year. See: http://e-democracy.org/se For all those enamored by Facebook and the like, using the Facebook neighborhood application I can identify about 20 people who live in the two neighborhoods. So the depth of activity on this an similar neighborhood forums - http://e-democracy.org/nf - is quite notable. Also note: http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/2rcxB7h01P342hRKBVeEeP Steven Clift E-Democracy.Org
A few questions: 1. In the U.S. context does anyone know if the courts have found the Internet to be a "public forum" like courts recognize public sidewalks or public parks as "places" historically recognized for free speech. 2. I've noticed a number of government websites with policy statements attempting to establish that their websites are not "limited (or designated) public forums." I bumped into one federal government online consultation that declared a limited public forum online for X days. Does anyone know of research in this area? (Due to the power of "one-way" e-government, I can imagine citizens pushing for two-way "designated public forums" on government websites within the context of public meeting agenda items for example in my lifetime.) 3. Is anyone aware of similar legal or court established concepts of "public forum" outside of the U.S.? Thanks, Steven Clift E-Democracy.Org