LiquidFeedback

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
LiquidFeedback

logo
Screenshot
Suggestion page for an initiative
Basic data

developer Public Software Group eV
Current  version Backend v3.1.0, frontend v3.1.0
operating system Web application (server: Unix derivatives / POSIX )
programming language Lua , SQL , PL / pgSQL , C
category Opinion formation and decision-making via the Internet
License MIT / X11 license
German speaking Yes
liquidfeedback.org

LiquidFeedback is a free software for political opinion formation and decision-making , which was developed and used in the environment of the Pirate Party . An important feature is the implementation of the liquid democracy approach, which is intended to establish a new form of political representation and participation. The boundaries between representative and direct democracy are designed to be fluid.

Basic idea

LiquidFeedback was originally intended as an aid for parties, associations and initiatives that want to use the Internet to form opinions and / or make decisions.

The aim is to solve structural problems inherent in other Internet media (e.g. unfair treatment of minorities or a lack of scalability) by means of a structured discourse and to ensure an opinion-forming process in which all participants are as equitable as possible and the overall process is manageable despite the large number of participants and remains effective.

On the one hand, LiquidFeedback uses the topic-related use of transitive voting rights transfer (Liquid Democracy); on the other hand, LiquidFeedback includes a special application development process that goes beyond the concepts of Liquid Democracy. The software deliberately refrains from using an application committee or appointing privileged moderators. Instead, the participants moderate collectively. This is made possible, among other things, by a special process control and sorting algorithms that are to sort user contributions based on their supporters in such a way that a representation of minority opinions is guaranteed without loud minorities being able to assume a dominant position.

use

An essential functional feature of LiquidFeedback is the introduction of text proposals that are to be voted on later. Here, the user must first select a suitable subject area and decide whether the text proposal (called the initiative) should form a new subject or be set as an alternative proposal to an initiative of an already existing subject. If a new topic is opened, a set of rules to be used must be selected depending on the initiator's objective, which specifies deadlines and quorums as well as the importance of a successful vote.

Rules are specified by the operator of the respective software installation. Examples for this are:

  • Amendment of the statutes
  • Application to the general meeting
  • Opinion for board resolutions
  • Quick poll

Topics and the initiatives they contain, which compete with one another, go through the following phases:

  • Approval (in earlier software versions: "New")
  • in discussion
  • Verification (in earlier software versions: "Frozen")
  • poll
  • Completed or canceled

As long as a topic is in the "approval", "under discussion" or "review" phases, participants in the system can each support one or more initiatives on a topic. If a topic is in the "Approval" state, an initiative must first collect a proportion of support votes determined by the rules. If this happens within a period specified by the set of rules, the topic is "under discussion". Otherwise the topic is canceled.

While a topic is in the “approval” or “under discussion” phase, the initiators of the initiative are able to improve their proposed text by making changes. Supporters of the initiative can note suggestions for the initiative or link their support to the implementation of certain suggestions for improvement. After a specified period, the topic changes from the discussion phase to the "review" state. This phase is used to prevent text changes shortly before the vote, since changes to the initiative are prevented with the freeze. After a further period has elapsed, the topic goes into the "vote" phase.

Only initiatives that were able to gather a second quorum of supporters' votes will ultimately be put to the vote. The amount of the second quorum of supporters also results from the set of rules used. Voting takes place by means of a preference voting process based on the Schulze method .

Basically, in all of these processes, your own voting weight can be delegated to other participants . Granted delegations can only be used if you are not actively involved in a topic. Granted delegations can be revoked at any time.

The system data of LiquidFeedback is always accessible for the user for the purpose of verifiability, only the data of ongoing voting are hidden, with the intention of avoiding tactical voting . See also: Arrow theorem and Gibbard-Satterthwaite theorem

Representation of minorities

LiquidFeedback has various mechanisms for representing minorities. Although votes ultimately follow the democratic majority principle, the software enables

  • Minorities and even individuals to present their points of view,
  • Minorities who have reached a certain size to put their positions to the vote.

The contributions are sorted in such a way that a proportional representation of the minorities is ensured. Depending on how the software is integrated, it is possible for minorities to bring their points of view directly to the top level of an organization for discussion.

technology

The front end of LiquidFeedback is written in Lua , the back end is a PostgreSQL server, where PL / pgSQL is used for procedural programming of the database . Both parts are managed by the Public Software Group e. V. and are under the MIT license .

An experimental API is available for LiquidFeedback , with which external programs can access the installation and thus offer additional services.

Areas of application

LiquidFeedback was originally planned as a tool for organizations and parties.

While the developers consider a binding use within political parties to be sensible, they rule out the use of LiquidFeedback (as well as any online procedure) in the legislature, insofar as this goes beyond the use of the preparation of referenda or is an additional channel between citizens and the legislature or administration acts.

history

development

LiquidFeedback was developed from October 2009 by Jan Behrens, Axel Kistner, Andreas Nitsche and Björn Swierczek. The publication is carried out by the Public Software Group e. V. On April 15, 2010 the first stable version 1.0.0 of the backend was published.

Version 2.0

LiquidFeedback was continuously developed in the following years. On June 29, 2012, the Public Software Group released version 2.0, a completely revised user interface.

Version 2.2 with proportional representation of minorities

With LiquidFeedback version 2.2, which was published on March 10, 2013, a mechanism for sorting minority positions was added to the software. According to the developers, the algorithm known as harmonic weighting is intended to ensure that minority opinions are presented appropriately even if a large number of applications have been made in the system.

Version 2.2.1, published on March 18, 2013, added another sorting algorithm, which should also improve the representation of minority opinions.

Version 3.0 and book release

The next major version jump to version number 3.0 took place on January 31, 2014, and again included a revision of the user interface. The new software was presented in The Hague together with the book "The Principles of LiquidFeedback" published at the same time by the software developers, Jan Behrens, Axel Kistner, Andreas Nitsche and Björn Swierczek . In the English-language book, the developers explain the principles and procedures of the software.

Two months later, with version 3.0.1, an adaptation of the vote counting procedure followed, which the developers justified in their publication The Liquid Democracy Journal .

Version 3.1

Version 3.1 of the software includes an interface for connecting LiquidFeedback with version control systems such as B. Git or Mercurial . The concepts implemented for this purpose were published on June 28, 2015, and the associated software on December 14, 2015, also under MIT license .

First assignment in the Pirate Party in Berlin

From January 2010, the first user was the Pirate Party Germany (Landesverband Berlin) for internal-party opinion-forming .

The statutes of the Berlin Pirates regulate that the organs are required to “use the Liquid Democracy System to obtain recommendations on the basis of their decisions and to justify decisions that differ from these recommendations”.

Founding of the Interactive Democracy eV

Use is open to all parties and organizations. Since the interest in information events on LiquidFeedback and other interactive forms of democracy is very high, the developers decided on June 27, 2010 to set up their own association, Interactive Democracy e. V. to found. The development of LiquidFeedback will continue as part of the Public Software Group e. V. continued.

Further use and reception

LiquidFeedback is used in the German Pirate Party by the regional associations of Berlin (since 2010), Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania (since 2012), Saxony-Anhalt (since 2012) and Saarland (since 2013). The pirate parties Italy and Austria have been using LiquidFeedback since 2011 and 2012, respectively. Other parties or their subdivisions use LiquidFeedback in test operation and in preparation for party congresses . Slow Food has also been using LiquidFeedback since March 2012. A first well-known example for use in companies is Synaxon AG .

LiquidFeedback has generated a certain amount of media interest. The Pirate Party expressed the hope that the software could solve the problems of grassroots democracy (see the solid law of the oligarchy ) better than was the case with the other parties. It was expected that the system would reward competence rather than publicity. In addition, the system's resistance to troublemakers (“ trolls ”) was praised as only constructive feedback should be possible.

In July 2012, the district council of the Lower Saxony district of Friesland unanimously decided to use the software as a platform for public participation from November 2012 under the name " LiquidFriesland ". LiquidFriesland was put into operation in November 2012. For LiquidFriesland, in addition to the possibilities of bottom-up communication, the instrument of top-down communication was installed in LiquidFeedback in order to be able to explore the acceptance of the district administration's projects among the citizens.

Data protection debate

The introduction of LiquidFeedback led to disputes within the German Pirate Party . Against the background that, for reasons of traceability in electronic voting, the software follows the concept of being able to assign every statement and every vote to a person retrospectively, some party members objected that data protection was disregarded. Since the software is designed for roll-call votes, inferences about the respective political opinion are always possible and also intended, according to the proponents; see also: Roll-call votes in the Bundestag .

The Pirate Party decided, however, to disguise the voting behavior of its members using pseudonyms . Because of this contradiction between pseudonymous voting and democratic principles, the developers distanced themselves from being involved in the pirate party. The pirate faction in the Berlin House of Representatives shared the developers' assessment in a statement.

In 2014, the Berlin Commissioner for Data Protection and Freedom of Information ( Alexander Dix , represented by an employee) declared his position that not only elections, but also other votes within political parties should be kept secret. The developers of LiquidFeedback, on the other hand, took the position that open votes on factual issues are permissible in political parties and that the party law only stipulates a secret ballot for certain people .

Individual evidence

  1. a b c website liquidfeedback.org. Retrieved February 17, 2016 .
  2. Andreas Nitsche: Liquid Democracy - what is actually flowing here and where? December 16, 2009, archived from the original on August 23, 2012 ; accessed on March 16, 2016 .
  3. a b c d e f g h i j Jan Behrens, Axel Kistner, Andreas Nitsche, Björn Swierczek: The Principles of LiquidFeedback . Interactive democracy e. V., Berlin 2014, ISBN 978-3-00-044795-2 ( online ).
  4. a b c LiquidFriesland - prosecute citizens' proceedings. Accessed on March 18, 2016 : "[...] LiquidFeedback [...] realizes a structured discourse that scales even with larger numbers of users. [...] LiquidFeedback protects minorities and their ability to present their point of view, but at the same time prevents the dominance of sheer minorities and manages without a moderator, since all participants are moderated collectively. "
  5. ^ A b c Jan Behrens: The evolution of proportional representation in LiquidFeedback . In: The Liquid Democracy Journal . No. 1 . Interactive Democracy eV, March 2014, ISSN  2198-9532 , DNB  1050096746 ( article in electronic edition [accessed on February 17, 2016]).
  6. ^ A b c Marcin Piechocki: Płynna demokracja w programie Partii Piratów . In: Wydział Nauk Politycznych i Dziennikarstwa, Uniwersytet im. Adama Mickiewicza w Poznaniu (Ed.): Przegląd Politologiczny . No. 1/2015 . Wydawnictwo Naukowe Wydziału Nauk Politycznych i Dziennikarstwa, 2015, ISSN  1426-8876 , p. 73–84 , doi : 10.14746 / pp.2015.20.1.5 ( online [PDF]).
  7. a b c d e f g h i j LiquidFeedback tips and tricks, 2nd revision. (PDF) March 2015, accessed on February 17, 2016 (PDF download).
  8. a b c LiquidFeedback: Project. Archived from the original on February 17, 2012 ; accessed on February 17, 2016 .
  9. Preferential voting in LiquidFeedback. Archived from the original on May 31, 2012 ; Retrieved March 3, 2016 .
  10. ^ Jan Behrens: Game of Democracy . In: The Liquid Democracy Journal . No. 2 . Interactive Democracy eV, October 7, 2014, ISSN  2198-9532 , DNB  106325583X ( article in electronic edition [accessed February 17, 2016]).
  11. LiquidFeedback developer platform. (No longer available online.) Formerly in the original ; accessed on February 17, 2016 .  ( Page no longer available , search in web archivesInfo: The link was automatically marked as defective. Please check the link according to the instructions and then remove this notice.@1@ 2Template: dead link / dev.liquidfeedback.org  
  12. We didn't want to question representative democracy. Zeit Online, February 15, 2013, accessed May 11, 2013 .
  13. ^ Andreas Nitsche: Liquid Democracy is not an alternative to the parliamentary republic. Retrieved May 11, 2013 .
  14. Axel Kistner: Citizen participation with LiquidFeedback. Retrieved May 11, 2013 .
  15. a b Andreas Nitsche: Mission - LiquidFeedback. (No longer available online.) Archived from the original on October 13, 2011 ; Retrieved November 19, 2011 . Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / liquidfeedback.org
  16. Public Software Group e. V. Retrieved November 19, 2011 .
  17. jbe: Added tag v1.0.0 for changeset 67a2e236fea4. April 15, 2010, accessed November 19, 2011 .
  18. LiquidFeedback Core (backend). Retrieved November 19, 2011 .
  19. a b LiquidFeedback Frontend project page at the Public Software Group. Retrieved February 17, 2016 .
  20. LiquidFeedback 2.0 release announcement. (No longer available online.) June 30, 2012, archived from the original on February 17, 2016 ; accessed on February 17, 2016 . Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / dev.liquidfeedback.org
  21. Detlef Borchers: Pirate Party uses Liquid Feedback 2.0. In: heise online. Heise Medien GmbH & Co. KG, August 13, 2012, accessed on February 17, 2016 .
  22. LiquidFeedback 3.0 - An Introduction. Retrieved February 17, 2016 .
  23. Freek Blankena: Online democratieplatform wellicht bruikbaar voor e-participatie. Binnenlands Bestuur bv, accessed on February 17, 2016 .
  24. Release of LiquidFeedback Core 2.2.6 and Core 3.0.1. (No longer available online.) June 30, 2012, archived from the original on March 7, 2016 ; accessed on February 17, 2016 . Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / dev.liquidfeedback.org
  25. ^ Jan Behrens: How Chaos Protected the Status Quo (more than we intended to) . In: The Liquid Democracy Journal . No. 2 . Interactive Democracy eV, October 7, 2014, ISSN  2198-9532 , DNB  106325583X ( article in electronic edition [accessed February 17, 2016]).
  26. ^ Björn Swierczek: Democratic File Revision Control with LiquidFeedback . In: The Liquid Democracy Journal . No. 4 . Interactive Democracy eV, July 28, 2015, ISSN  2198-9532 , DNB  1080274499 ( article in electronic edition [accessed on February 17, 2016]).
  27. Andreas Nitsche: LiquidFeedback 3.1 for democratic software and product development. Interactive Democracy eV, December 14, 2015, accessed on February 17, 2016 .
  28. ^ Lena Rohrbach: Press release: Pirate party revolutionizes internal party discourse. Retrieved February 12, 2013 .
  29. a b Statutes of the Pirate Party Germany Berlin, § 11 - Liquid Democracy. Retrieved January 26, 2013 .
  30. LiquidFeedback license (MIT / X11). Archived from the original on February 8, 2013 ; Retrieved March 3, 2016 .
  31. jbebln: developers found Interactive Democracy e. V. June 27, 2010, accessed November 19, 2011 .
  32. ^ Statutes of the Pirate Party State Association Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, § 9b - The State Members' Assembly. Retrieved January 26, 2013 .
  33. ^ Statutes of the Pirate Party of the State Association of Saxony-Anhalt, Section D: Liquid Democracy. Retrieved February 5, 2013 .
  34. Piratenwiki - Pirate Party Italy. Retrieved August 6, 2012 .
  35. ^ Austria: Pirate Party decides on program online. (No longer available online.) Formerly in the original ; Retrieved August 6, 2012 .  ( Page no longer available , search in web archivesInfo: The link was automatically marked as defective. Please check the link according to the instructions and then remove this notice.@1@ 2Template: Toter Link / futurezone.at  
  36. Brandeins: Revolution from Above. (No longer available online.) Archived from the original on March 9, 2013 ; Retrieved January 13, 2013 . Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.brandeins.de
  37. Dirk von Gehlen: Liquid Feedback: The pirates make democracy liquid. In: Jetzt.de. Süddeutsche Zeitung, May 13, 2010, accessed on November 21, 2011 .
  38. Partido Pirata usa tecnologia digital para garantir política participativa. Deutsche Welle, January 8, 2010, accessed November 21, 2011 (Portuguese).
  39. Political parties on the Internet: Still online, Honorable Member? Stern.de, January 22, 2010, accessed November 21, 2011 .
  40. ^ Revolution of intra-party democracy. Pirate Party Germany , May 16, 2010, accessed on November 19, 2011 .
  41. Peter Zschunke: Dare more democracy on the Internet. August 5, 2010, accessed November 19, 2011 .
  42. Martin Haase, Christopher Lauer : Part 6: Liquid Democracy. March 29, 2010, accessed November 19, 2011 .
  43. LiquidFriesland - project description. (No longer available online.) Friesland district, archived from the original on March 5, 2016 ; Retrieved March 3, 2016 . Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / buergerinfo.friesland.de
  44. ↑ Public participation: District of Friesland introduces Liquid Feedback. Zeit Online, November 9, 2012, accessed November 16, 2012 .
  45. ^ The Potsdam eGovernment Competence Center: District of Friesland introduces Liquid Feedback . November 12, 2012
  46. a b Keywan Najafi Tonekaboni: Liquid feedback developers criticize the pirate party. In: golem.de. Golem Media GmbH, September 19, 2012, accessed on February 16, 2016 .
  47. adg: pirates arguing over democracy silver bullet. Spiegel Online , August 6, 2010, accessed November 19, 2011 .
  48. Jan Behrens, Axel Kistner, Andreas Nitsche and Björn Swierczek: LiquidFeedback developers distance themselves from using their software in the pirate party. In: LiquidFeedback - Interactive Democracy. September 17, 2012, accessed October 4, 2012 .
  49. ^ Pirate faction AGH Berlin: Statement of the faction on the LQFB. (No longer available online.) November 27, 2012, archived from the original on January 20, 2015 ; Retrieved January 27, 2013 . Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / redmine.piratenfraktion-berlin.de
  50. ^ Daniel Holzapfel: Opinion on the planned real name obligation in the LiquidFeedback system of the Pirate Party Germany Berlin. (PDF) November 13, 2014, accessed January 4, 2016 .
  51. Axel Kistner, Björn Swierczek: On the admissibility of open votes in political parties in the Federal Republic of Germany. Interactive Democracy eV, November 26, 2014, accessed on February 17, 2016 .