The Role of The Parliamentary Mirror App

[KipCrossing]

The Parliamentary Mirror App

(App name to be confirmed)

I recently had conversations with Daithí about the upcoming production of the Parliamentary Mirror App and we were discussing my ideas on how to implement, promote and use the App and it quickly became apparent that there was a disconnect between our ideas of what the core role of the App would be.

Note: this is NOT the IBDD Flux App

What we agreed it would be

We all agree that it would be a parliamentary mirror, posting current bills from Australian Parliaments and allowing the users to up/down vote those issues; essentially serving as an accurate, user verified (on the AEC) poll. Then the collective results for each area (constituency) would be compared with how their representative voted; then advertise the results and alert their representative.

Where we differed

• I imagined that the app would be separate from the flux party; simply a platform where every bill is able to be judged via a poll and anyone can vote once confirmed via the AEC. At a future date, serve as a springboard to onboard voters to flux.
• Daithí thought that the app would be a part of the flux party and exclusively available to flux party members to vote on bills. It would encourage people to join Flux (as a party) to have their say.

It seems as though most people who are involved with this first "Parliamentary Mirror" App fall into one of these two camps of thought.

• Also see the Third Option below.

---

Discussing the Advantages and Disadvantages of each

I am creating this issue to facilitate a discussion around what role this app should have; simply by stating the Pros and Cons of the role.

Separate from Flux

App as Public Domain Touchstone

Pros

• Lower barrier to entry for new members; building up a users database faster
• Simple to understand
• The ability to work with partners; newspapers, political think tanks, other parties, government organisations.
• Influencers can promote without having to be affiliated with flux (a political party)
• Blockchain would be optional

Cons

• Having to start from scratch

A part of Flux

App as Flux Political Party Perq

Pros

• Showing our existing members that we are making progress
• Incentivising others to join flux so they can have their say

Cons

• Having the stigma of being a political party with an agenda

I can't think of everything so please comment on this issue and add pros/cons for each role or add your general thoughts.

[nathanchat]

I think of Flux as a movement promoting a specific form of Issue Based Direct Democracy first, and second as a political party, insofar as this is a transient identity of convenience. If we build everything around Flux as a political party, we will self-limit our vision of DD. True DD isn't proxy representation and we should not aim for compromise as the end state. So I believe your choice of labels "Separate from Flux" and "A part of Flux" assume Flux only = Political Party. No representative from another political party is going to listen or respond to unsolicited feedback from a competing party outside of the Question Time / Media Circus arenas.
How about "App as Public Domain Touchstone" vs "App as Flux Political Party Benefit"

I am definitely in the camp that believes this app should be as broadly used as possible to raise awareness of alignment between MP and their electorate, e.g. option 1.

A strong pro of marketing the app (which I'm calling Legislationator) as a chance to tell your MP what you think is that this has broad appeal and will increase the chances of every electorate getting some active users voting. It would be good to add state and federal electorate membership to our Flux member demographics in any case, so we can be informed as we make this choice. It may turn out that 8800 Members are contained in 17 electorates, and 15 of these are safe Red or Blue seats. If so, we'll definitely choose to broaden the funnel up front.

[connorhsm]

At first read and thought, my opinion would be to position the app as an in-between of these two options.

Make it known that the app is associated with Flux, but only to a certain degree. Possibly something similar to what we've been seeing recently from Facebook and their subsidiary applications. Everything is labelled as "From Facebook" but still retains its own branding and identity.

I would have a concern if there were no official recognition that such an application was built by Flux members to be entirely separate. I believe this could raise some eyebrows and only hinder positioning the app as independent within the public domain. This would especially be the case considering Flux markets its self as the "most transparent political party".

But I also disagree with walling off the application only to registered members of the party. Whilst you can undoubtedly argue this may attract people to join the party, it could equally be argued that allowing anyone registered with the AEC to try out the app may allow greater understanding and demonstrate how things may work in the official app, which could also attract people to join the party.
I also hold the opinion that walling the app off to members in an attempt for new people to join the party comes across as a sly marketing trick.

From this, I lean towards the first option in that the app is separate from Flux whilst containing limited Flux branding with a clear/transparent statement that Flux somewhat has a stake in the app whilst sharing mediums would contain little to no Flux branding.

[BenBallingall]

This is my answer, similar to Connor.
Something like "Parliamentary Mirror App - an SVxFlux production"

App should definitely be free to use by all Australians, with just throughputs into Flux - links out to sign up as a Flux member. Plus all of Australia is already a pretty huge opt in mailing list - anyone that ever wants to see what it is, as opposed to the people that make it past the barrier of having to sign up with a political party just to use an app.

Wwwaaayyyyy more disruptive, marketable and useful to people as an open app. But no shame in pushing anyone intrigued by digital politics to VoteFlux...

[alexjuiceman]

I'm not certain I quite understand your existing pros and cons list, I'm not sure why it being a Flux branded project would:

• Make it any harder or simpler to understand.
• Affect the ability to work with partners; newspapers, political think tanks, other parties, government organisations.
• Affect blockchain being optional, just because our final goal intends to utilise blockchain doesn't mean every tool we use to get there has to.
• Mean having to start from scratch, how would branding it Flux change the work that's already been put in?

In terms of "Influencers can promote without having to be affiliated with flux (a political party)/Having the stigma of being a political party with an agenda." I feel like this project is clearly a political project aimed at either people who are politically engaged or to encourage people to become politically engaged. To that end connecting to a political movement like Flux, with the clearly stated aims of changing the existing political structure of the country would seem like more of an advantage that a disadvantage.

I think that as most people have identified this project is best with large numbers of participants, so anything you can do to lower the barrier to take part would be hugely beneficial for the primary stated goal.

I agree wholeheartedly with your pros list for it being Flux branded.

I agree with Connor that there is a potentially large con in not being branded Flux that it could call into question the transparency claim of the movement if (when, if the project is successful) it becomes clear that the two are connected.

Conclusion:

Where this leaves me is the best of both worlds would seem to be to produce a Flux branded app that doesn't require you to be a Flux member to participate (but lets you join or not as you wish), which seems to be a fairly popular conclusion.

[kenrob2]

I don't know what the development plan or the deployment plan is, but I'd support initially directing the app to Flux members only, since they're most likely to understand the philosophy behind the app, perhaps as a broad beta phase? Once that restricted audience has had an opportunity to hammer that version to death, and the inevitable refinements that will follow, then open it up to the populace at large with a suitable information/sales campaign. (There may be no cost, but the idea will still have to be 'sold'.)

Otherwise I generally agree with the preceding responses and with Alex's Conclusion.

[KipCrossing]

It seems as though this debate has diverged into 2 questions:

• Q1: Should the Parliamentary Mirror App (PMA) be integrated into the existing flux platform (https://app.flux.party/login/) and be exclusive to flux members?
• Q2: If not, should the PMA have Flux branding?

---

I personally think no for both:

• For Q1, I think it would be great if all could join, to expose it's users to the concept of being closer to parliament through the PMA. To start to build up a database of users to push the idea of flux at a future date.

• For Q2: I think having it be a "Flux" app could a) confuse people who think they are getting the IBDD app and b) deter people from using the platform with the branding of a political party if they align with other parties or simply don't want to associate with a political party. @connorhsm brings up a good point that it should still be transparent with its association with the Flux party; therefore, I would be in favour of including the association in the credits (kind of like how SecureVote does: https://secure.vote/)

[KipCrossing]

It looks like there is a 3rd Option (@XertroV 's vision): Use the current UI/APP (https://app.flux.party/login/) and allow all to join; voting within.

This option is not at all obvious as the current app serves at the Flux Party member portal and is, therefore, exclusive to Flux Party members. With option 3, once users have joined, there may be an option like "Help elect a representative who will vote in line with these results by becoming a member of the flux party" The question for me, that comes up, is a conceptual one. That is, How close should the PMA be to the flux party form a user perspective?

• Will having FLUX party branding all over (eg login page) deter people from joining? ie people from other parties or lobbies?
• Will Branding matter? Perhaps most people have not heard of flux.
• Should we just get rid of the word party? It's not like we have policies anyway and the party part is a means to an end.

[KipCrossing]

I wrote the app, so it looks like I got my way: https://github.com/voteflux/voting_app