Talk:Voter's Guide

From Wikibooks, the open-content textbooks collection

I had this idea the other day, and I'm excited about it. I think this is a way that Wikibooks and the rest of Wikimedia's projects could gain some publicity and respect. I could easily see that, by the 2008 US election, we could have well-developed guides to the issues, parties and candidates, vetted by people of all political stripes and found neutral, and available in a dozen or more languages... This will require a number of participants, however, of diverse backgrounds. TUF-KAT 00:54, 4 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Contents 1 NPOV implies Wikipedia article 2 Wikipedia-related idea 3 Related projects 4 Just some notes on potential structures 4.1 Departments 5 Name suggestions 6 Campaigns.wikia.com

[edit] NPOV implies Wikipedia article

When an issue is described with a NPOV, it should be in Wikipedia, leaving the contentious, left vs right, issues summarized here, with the relevant interwikilinks, of course. in fact, the Wikipedia article will also benefit from a summary of the contentious issues explained more here too. Mark Hurd 10:04, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Um, neutral point of view is a policy across all of Wikimedia, it is not limited to Wikipedia. That being said, each project applies it differently, and the Voter Guide will need to have a special application of the policy, as the Wikimedia Foundation could loose it's non-profit status in the US (where the foundation is located) if it violates certin campaign laws, such as endorsing a particular candidate for office. There was a short discussion of this earlier on the Foundation-l mailing list. Gentgeen 12:26, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I agree that neutrality is important here. Also, the Voter's Guide should focus on which candidates and parties hold the various positions. There should indeed by summaries of why people hold different opinions, but I agree that the nitty-gritty should be in Wikipedia. I think the purpose of the Voter's Guide should be to point voters who already have at least a vague idea of where they stand on the issues to the candidates who best represent those positions. For example, we can summarize the gun control arguments and explain what various pieces of legislation mean, with the primary purpose of explaining which politicians hold various views -- all the historical details and such should be at Wikipedia, and we should be liberally interlinking with those articles. TUF-KAT 17:54, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia-related idea

On Wikipedia, I nominated "Voter education" for collaboration of the week. But it needs two more votes by Oct. 17 to avoid removal.

Maurreen, Oct. 17, 2004

[edit] Related projects

I am aware of a few "related projects" that you may want to check out, either as an alternative to this format, complementing this site, or as a place to grab content from:

1. The Pittsburgh Forum: Similar idea to meta:Wikibate, may eventually change name. (Currently public domain, but may change to GFDL or CC-SA)
2. LibertarianWiki: An encyclopedia for libertarians (Public domain)
3. DKosopedia: A progressive political encyclopedia (GFDL)
4. The Progress Pittsburgh Knowledge Base: A local progressive group, probably has the resources to make a good voter's guide. (No copyright notice, but told me that they do not intend to make the information free)
5. theballot.org: The ultimate progressive peoples' voter guide. Find, create and share progressive voters guides.

w:User:AdamRetchless

[edit] Just some notes on potential structures

Feel free to comment - TUF-KAT 04:43, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

(Since I haven't thought of a remotely usable name for the whole proposal, I'm just calling it The Guide for the moment)

The Guide's purpose should be to encourage an educated debate of controversial issues and to provide a neutral database of information to help guide newcomers to our subjects. Note that by "encouraging an educated debate", I don't mean actually holding debates, but rather giving a one-stop source for information on why beliefs are held.

[edit] Departments

Voter's Guide: Collects information on specific elections, parties and candidates

Voter's Guide:George W. Bush with standardized subpages like maybe Voter's Guide:George W. Bush - Voting Record or Campaign Funding and the like.

Voter's Guide:Democratic Party with standardized subpages on whatever seems important

Voter's Guide:U.S. presidential election, 2008 with subpages if needed

We don't limit the notability of elections for any local, provincial or state elections. We should also allow for voter's guides for things like unions and other large organizations, but not for every podunk clubhouse, so there should be a line somewhere.

Issue Guide: (or a better name) collection of relevant facts and arguments on a particular debate

We should also have a guide to debates of fact. Maybe Issue Guide:Number of civilian Iraqis killed during the US occupation of Iraq, for example, where we could collect information on the different numbers that have been produced, explaining how they were derived. Also Issue Guide:Change in homelessness during the Bush Administration

Maybe a separate section for conspiracy theories

We should have a section for brief explanations of logical fallacies of all kinds. This would be useful to link to.

Need to set a line for issues. Issue Guide:How much does Pantera RAWK!? is out, but Issue Guide:Nu Metal, if done in a neutral fashion, would be fine. What about, however, critical reviews of movies and the like? Perhaps even expand into all manner of opinions and provide a meta-database of critical reviews of movies, albums and books.

A standardized method of citing scholarly journals. Say, on medical marijuana or the effects of secondhand smoke.

We should treat all opinions equally, assuming they are not idiosyncratic. I mean really equally, irregardless of popularity -- should Voter's Guide:Barack Obama document that some may not want to vote for him because he is black? With a link to Issue Guide:White Supremacy, of course. I think so, since it isn't our place to judge the reasonableness of opinions -- we provide documentation of reasons why people hold opinions.

The namespace Issue Guide should be for overviews of a particular dispute. The namespace Morality should be for examining moral claims that are inherently unprovable. The namespace Factual Claim should be used for (theoretically) verifiable statements such as those involving history and statistics. The namespace Premise should be used for other claims which rely on unverifiable statements but are not direct moral claims (such as funding priorities, justifications for specific bills and actions).

[edit] Name suggestions

Please, we need names

For the overarching project consisting of the Issue Guide, the Voter's Guide and all related paraphernalia. This is the one that really should begin with Wiki:

• Some words to consider: en:forum, en:concord, en:summit, en:dispute, en:controversy, en:issue, en:debate, en:parliament, en:congress, en:feast, en:senate (mediators in ancient Rome were called internuncius, medium, intercessor, philantropus, interpolator, conciliator, interlocutor, interpres, and finally mediator)

Other words:

• k'e - Navajo, meaning solidarity and reciprocity or what I do has an impact on you and what you do has an impact on me
• hozhooji naat’aanii - Navajo, meaning peacemaking or people talking together to re-form relationships with each other and the universe, combination of the words for rightness and to talk
• ki-ah-m - Cree, meaning law or for everything you do, good or bad, there are consequences, similar to the Zulu ubuntu (which is also defined as an attitude of

togetherness in spirit and humanness), and is also compared to Navajo k'e and Lakota ti ospaye

• Another example of peace-building mechanism comes from the Banyarwanda community in Rwanda. Gacaca, an intricate system of

customs and traditions that starts at community level, derives its name from a grass called Urucaca that thrives well in homesteads. The mechanism is founded on dialogue, reconciliation and reparation. Whenever there is a feud between two or more parties, elders gather in front of the homestead amidst Urucaca. Each party is then asked to present their case. The role of the council of elders is to facilitate the reconstruction of relationships. Meanwhile the party in the wrong is required to pay a fine as a way of punishment. Soon after, beer is shared by both parties and the council of elders, followed by a feast.

• In Botswana, traditional courts form a critical part of the justice system, Judge Elijah Legwaila, President of Botswana's

Industrial Court, told participants in the inter-faith summit. Traditional dispute resolution, principally aimed at preventing the rupture of relationships, in addition to rectifying the wrong, begins at the family level. In cases where disputes cannot be dealt with at that level, they are referred to the ward Kgotla, a localized court in the vicinity of the defendant's home. Throughout the process, the defendant's kinsmen are actively involved. If the matter cannot be resolved at the ward Kgotla, then it goes to the main Kgotla, which is presided over by the chief. Mokgwa le Molao, the legal system in this context, literally means "law and custom," and expresses the character of a system of law that prescribes a moral content.

• In modern Rwanda, Gacaca is used as an institution to find out the truth about the 1994 genocide. The country's special genocide

courts have tried less than six percent of those detained for suspected genocide offences. There are some 110,000 Rwandese in the country's detention facilities, the vast majority of them still awaiting trial. The Gacaca system currently works as a tribunal, having been embraced by the community and the law. Late last year, 260,000 adults of "integrity, honesty and good conduct" were selected by local communities to serve as magistrates on the more than 10,000 Gacaca tribunals.

• ho‘oponopono - Hawaiian, a mediation session among a family in which all discussion is directed towards a leader that attempts reconciliation (Note: the word wiki is originally Hawaiian)
• mogaji, the lineage head, and the baale, an elderly head of the district, act as mediators among the Yoruba They apparently use blackmail and the threat of excommunication to achieve a compromise
• So Da Bee - title of a Yoruba television show in which disputes are solved
• The ancient Indian system of Panchayat involved a mediator (pancha), whose decisions were irreversible
• In early Irish law, a brithem, who had trained in law but had not been appointed by the king as the official judge, could work as an arbitrator. The law established the arbitrator’s pay at one-twelfth of the sum at issue.
• Old Testament - King Solomon
• Jewish tradition, based on the Torah and Talmud, provided a judicial setting called Beth Din in which disputants argued their case before three rabbinical judges. The disputants first had to agree to be bound by the judges’ decision. Prior to appearing before the judges, the disputants were strongly urged to resolve their differences informally in bitzua(mediation) or p’sharah (arbitration)
• From the earliest days of Islam, Muhammad (570?–632) encouraged and practiced tahkim, or arbitration, to resolve a variety of disputes. Muhammad’s role as arbitrator is sanctioned by revelation. Once Islam became dominant in a community, local law was amended to include arbitration (Moussalli, 1997).
• The Islamic tradition and culture focuses more on the group or community than on the individual. Originating in ancient Middle Eastern tribes and villages were the dispute resolution practices of Sulh(settlement) and Musalaha (reconciliation). The two together, often referred to simply as Sulh, have been used to control conflict and maintain harmony within and between tightly knit social groups. The ritual practices involve conversations, information sharing, and exchanging promises about the future.
• The Acholi's Mato-Oput ritual involves the appearance of an individual or group of people involved in a conflict before a

council of elders (Lotido-Apoka)... Mato-Oput is usually performed after a fight, disagreement or any rift that would affect harmonious coexistence in the society. Where arms are involved, a ceremony known as "bending of spears" is performed. This involves the exchange of spears between the warring parties and the bending of the tips of the same. From then on, all the parties must vow not to harm one another, since they are united by the ritual and therefore rendered brothers and sisters.

• It'd be neat to have a name based on one of these traditional terms related to dispute resolution - Wikike, Wikubuntu, Wikipono, Wikisolomon, Wikipancha, Wikibrithem, Wikitakhem, Wikioput
• Other Ideas: Wikisummit, Wikiforum (I believe it's taken)
• Some words to replace Issue Guide as a namespace and a specific part of the project: Disputarium or Disputorium

I rather like the idea of using some kind of traditional dispute resolution, since our goal after all is to facilitate communication among people who disagree with each other so that everyone can hopefully come to an amicable, informed and conscientious position. Of these, Wikubuntu is nice. From the Zulu word ubuntu which I have found defined as an attitude of togetherness in spirit and humanness, humanity to others, humanness and I am what I am because of who we all are. It is also apparently the name of a Linux distribution. It serves as the spiritual foundation of African societies. It is a unifying vision or world view enshrined in the Zulu maxim umuntu ngumuntu ngabantu, i.e. a person is a person through other persons (Shutte, 1993:46). At bottom, this traditional African aphorism articulates a basic respect and compassion for others. It can be interpreted as both a factual description and a rule of conduct or social ethic. It both describes human being as "being-with-others" and prescribes what "being-with-others" should be all about. Later, Ubuntu underscores the importance of agreement or consensus. African traditional culture, it seems, has an almost infinite capacity for the pursuit of consensus and reconciliation (Teffo, 1994a:4). Democracy the African way does not simply boil down to majority rule. Traditional African democracy operates in the form of (sometimes extremely lengthy) discussions (cf. Busia, 1967:28). Although there may be a hierarchy of importance among the speakers, every person gets an equal chance to speak up until some kind of an agreement, consensus or group cohesion is reached. This important aim is expressed by words like simunye ("we are one", i.e. "unity is strength") and slogans like "an injury to one is an injury to all" (Broodryk, 1997a:5, 7, 9). Also, Ubuntu inspires us to expose ourselves to others, to encounter the difference of their humanness so as to inform and enrich our own (cf. Sidane, 1994:8-9). Thus understood, umuntu ngumuntu ngabantu translates as: "To be human is to affirm one's humanity by recognising the humanity of others in its infinite variety of content and form" (Van der Merwe, 1996:1). This translation of Ubuntu attests to a respect for particularity, individuality and historicality, without which decolonization cannot be. and The Ubuntu respect for the particularities of the beliefs and practices of others (cf. also Wiredu, 1995), is especially emphasised by a striking, yet (to my mind) lesser-known translation of umuntu ngumuntu ngabantu, viz.: "A human being is a human being through (the otherness of) other human beings" (Van der Merwe, 1996:1— italics mine). For post-apartheid South Africans of all colours, creeds and cultures, Ubuntu dictates that, if we were to be human, we need to recognise the genuine otherness of our fellow citizens. Ubuntu's respect for the particularity of the other, links up closely to its respect for individuality and Ubuntu defines the individual in terms of his/her relationship with others (Shutte, 1993:46ff). According to this definition, individuals only exist in their relationships with others, and as these relationships change, so do the characters of the individuals. Thus understood, the word "individual" signifies a plurality of personalities corresponding to the multiplicity of relationships in which the individual in question stands. Being an individual by definition means "being-with-others". "With-others", as Macquarrie rightly observes, "...is not added on to a pre-existent and self-sufficient being; rather, both this being (the self) and the others find themselves in a whole wherein they are already related" (1972:104). (Much of the previous from [1]).

So... I kind of like Wikubuntu, though it is weird-looking and kind of difficult to pronounce. Anyone know how ubuntu is pronounced in Zulu? TUF-KAT 03:45, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Campaigns.wikia.com

On July 4th, Jimmy Wales launched Campaigns Wikia at Wikia.com, and it seems to dovetail with this Voter's Guide project. I'd like to propose that much of the content here be moved to that site. It might be useful to have a wikibook describing how to vote in general terms, but getting down to candidate names and specific initiatives and levies that might be on a ballot somewhere seems to be beyond the scope of the Wikipedia Foundation. Chadlupkes 21:21, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

While this may be considered a gentle suggestion that it is, this should not be considered as rationale for a VfD of this book. Unfortunately, any effort that may have been put into this Wikibook may have in fact been zapped by this alternative Wiki. Some of the voter's guides that have been generated here are of some significant value, and this is not necessarily outside of the scope of Wikibook.... provided it is NPOV and you can cite sources for the information that is being presented. BTW, what exactly is "outside the scope of the Wikipedia Foundation"? I didn't even know there was a Wikipedia Foundation. The Wikimedia Foundation does try to set the scope of some projects, but I don't know of anything explicitly wrong here unless the WMF board itself is explicitly endorsing and providing financial or other support (like hosting an advocacy website) for a political candidate. That is outside of the scope of this book and against Wikibooks policies as well like WB:WIW. --Rob Horning 22:11, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

To be fair, Erik has used the term "Wikipedia foundation" frequently enough on foundation-l to create more then a little bit of confusion. --Whiteknight (Page) (Talk) 22:12, 25 June 2007 (UTC)