Jump to content

User:Aurabarrera/sandbox

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Comparison of Civic Technology Platforms[edit]

Civic Technology[edit]

Civic Technology is defined as technology that enables engagement, participation or enhances the relationship between the people and government by enhancing citizen communications and public decision, improving government delivery of service, and infrastructure. Civic technology platforms specifically designed to improve citizen participation in governance. We distinguished civic tech from government technology. Government technology being technology that directyl deals with government infrastructure.

Platform Types[edit]

We used the categorization on democratic innovations according to Graham Smith[1]:

  • Electoral innovations - "aim to increase electoral turnout"
  • Consultation innovations - "aim to inform decision-makers of citizens’ views"
  • Deliberative innovations - "aim to bring citizens together to deliberate on policy issues, the outcomes of which may influence decision-makers"
  • Co-governance innovations - "aim to give citizens significant influence during the process of decision-making"
  • Direct democracy innovations - "aim to give citizens final decision-making power on key issues"
  • E-democracy innovations - "use information technology to engage citizens in the decision-making process"

Comparison Chart[edit]

Platform Name Founder Dates Active Corporate Structure Geography Parent Company Party Affiliation Technology Used Open Source Software License Primary Funders Platform Type
Brigade James Windon, Jason Putorti, John Thrall, Matt Mahan, Miche Capone[2] Apr 14, 2014[2] - Present For Profit San Francisco, United States[3] Brigade Media Proprietary software No Marc Benioff, SV Angel,[2] Sean Parker[4] Electoral Innovation, Deliberative Innovation
Loomio Ben Knight[5] Nov 1, 2012[5] - Present For Profit[5] Wellington, New Zealand[5] Ruby, Javascript[6] Yes AGPL v3[7] Crowdfunding[8] Deliberative Innovation
DemocracyOS Pia Mancini, Santiago Siri[9] 2012[9] - Present Non Profit[9] Palo Alto, United States[9] Democracy Earth Foundation Net Party[10] JavaScript[11] Yes GPL v3[12] Y Combinator, Teespring[9] Direct Democracy Innovation
GovTrack Joshua Tauberer[13] 2003[14] - Present Washington, District of Columbia, United States[15] Civic Impulse, LLC[16] Django[17] Yes Crowdfunding
Fluicity Julie de Pimodan, Jonathan Meiss, Nicolas de Briey[18] July 2015[19] - Present For Profit[20] Paris, France[18] Proprietary software No Consultation Innovation
Hustle Perry Rosenstein, Roddy Lindsay, Tyler Brock[21] Dec 2014[21] For Profit[21] San Francisco, United States[21] Proprietary software No Social Capital (venture capital) Electoral Innovation
Capitol Bells Ted Henderson[22] 2013[22] - Present For Profit[22] Washington, DC, United States[22] Proprietary software No Consultation Innovation
NGP Van Mark T. Sullivan, Nathaniel Pearlman 1997-Present[23] For Profit[23] Washington, DC, United States[23] Democratic and Progressive Campaigns[23] Proprietary software No E-democracy innovation
LiquidFeedback Andreas Nitsche, Jan Behrens, Axel Kistner and Bjoern Swierczek[24] November 2009[25] Berlin, Germany[26] Public Software Group, Interaktive Demokratie, FlexiGuided GmbH[25] German Pirate Party Lua (programming language), PL/pgSQL Yes MIT License Deliberative Innovation
OpenGov Joe Lonsdale, Mike Rosengarten, Nate Levine, Zac Bookman[27] 2012-Present For Profit[27] Redwood City, CA, United States JavaScript, Ruby, Java, Python[28] Yes Emerson Collective[27]
PopVox Marci Harris 2010 - Present For Profit Washington, DC, United States Proprietary software No Consultation Innovation
Turbovote Kathryn Peters, Seth Flaxman[29] 2010-Present [29] For Profit[29] Democracy Works[30] Proprietary software No Electoral Innovation
iSideWith Taylor Peck, Nick Boutelier[31] March 2012- Present[31] Los Angeles, CA, United States[31] Not affiliated[31] Amazon AWS, Facebook API, Twitter API, PHP, PostgreSQL, Postgis, Perl, Ubuntu Server, Apache, HTML, CSS, SVG, JQuery, GeoIP, Google Analytics[32] No Electoral Innovation
We The People Obama administration September 2011 - Present Government Agency Washington, DC, United States Democratic Party JavaScript, PHP, CSS[33] Yes GNU General Public License[33] United States Government Co-governance Innovation
Voatz Nimit S. Sawhney[34] 2014-Present[34] For Profit[34] Boston, United States[35] Go[36] No Medici Ventures[37] Electoral Innovation
Helios Voting Ben Adida 2008-Present[38] Non Profit Python, JavaScript, HTML[39] Yes Apache License[39] Direct Democracy Innovation
U Report UNICEF Innovation[40] May 2011- Present[41] Non Profit New York, United States UNICEF Python, HTML, CSS[42] Yes GNU Affero General Public License[42] Consultation Innovation
Maji Voice Water Services Regulatory Board (WASREB) 2012 - Present[43] Government Agency Nairobi, Kenya Water Services Regulatory Board (WASREB) Open Source[43] Yes GNU General Public License[44] World Bank Water and Sanitation Program[43] Consultation Innovation
Democracy 2.1 Karel Janeček 2013-Present Prague Municipal District, Czech Republic Proprietary software No Direct Democracy Innovation
Secure Vote Max Kaye, Nathan Spataro[45] 2016-Present[45] New South Wales[45] Python, HTML, Shell[46] No Blockchain[45] Direct Democracy Innovation

See Also[edit]

Category:Democracy Category:Civic Technology Category:Political software Category:Open government Category:Voting Category:Direct democracy


Draft Notes[edit]

Draft #1 Outline[edit]

Introduction to civic technology topics. Link to the civic technology wikipedia article and maybe other background information on the categorization of different technologies.

The initial comparison should comprise of these categories: the software name, creator, initial release date, software license, programming language, business model. Can also include a consideration of privacy and data policies that they have open.

The target audience should incorporate: public, private, enterprise, education, personal, scientific.

Features on the software specifically can compare in the different categories: campaign, government, voting, etc. Then compare features specific to to each for example in the voting platforms it can compare if there are ways to create a campaign and preliminary steps to confirm user identity.

Initial Overview[edit]

Currently there is no comparison of civic technology platforms the closest is this list of civic tech companies and the civic tech article. But we would want ot make a comparison like the wiki software comparison.

Some other sources that would be helpful is a yearly list of companies in the civic tech space and start-ups in the civic tech. I would also include the platforms that we had guest speakers about and ones that were included in our syllabus.

Possible Topics[edit]

Firechat[edit]

This is the existing article: FireChat.

Currently the article is a stub with one or two sentences for each topic. What I would add is the use of Firechat for emergency disaster uses. From my research I saw that it grew in popularity with the hurricanes in 2017 and that the company itself was creating a product called alerts to help the emergency responders get their message to people when there is no wifi. There is also not a lot on the background of the product's makers and the ways the product has been monetized. Also including a more in-depth explanation about the technology behind it could help people understand how it works.

Comparison Chart of Civic Technology Platforms[edit]

This would be a new article. It is necessary to compare them and define different types of civic tech. There is a similar page here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_wiki_software.

This is helpful because there are many platforms in many different categories of civic tech but they have different business models, products, and technologies related to them. As the field of civic tech grows it would be very helpful to be able to look at existing and past civic tech platforms. Such a comparison can help the future producers of civic tech find the best fit using the examples listed.

Article evaluation[edit]

Things to consider

  • Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?
  • Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
  • Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
  • Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article?
  • Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted?
  • Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?
  • Check out the Talk page of the article. What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
  • How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
  • How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

Evaluation of Socrata Wikipedia Page[edit]

All the information in the page is relevant to the subject matter. They have a section for history, a section where they talk about the problem Socrata was made to solve named "the government data dilemma". In this section the writing is less neutral by framing the problem and it reads kind of like a mission statement, where Socrata is shown to be solving the problem for government data. They use the words They have a section called technology where they talk about the data as a service then there is a subsection where they describe the machine learning that Socrata provides called Datalens. Then there is a section that covers the products that Socrata offers such as Open Data, Performance Management, Financial Insights, Citizen Connect, and Open Data API. It is useful to have a list of customers and funding sources to trace where the money comes from. The article is mostly neutral. It talks about how Socrata is solving the data problem. The views that are represented are the views of Socrata and an outsider's perspective on the technology. There aren't any viewpoints from Socrata's customers, like perspectives about the product and how it works from their point of view. Two of the links are broken, there aren't sources for a lot of the sections. The sections missing sources are the descriptions of the products and the customer list, we can assume that they might have been taken from the Socrata website. The sources are all reputable news sources except for the two links that are broken. There is no talk page

  1. ^ Graham, Smith (2005). "Beyond the ballot: 57 democratic innovations from around the world". westminsterresearch.wmin.ac.uk. Retrieved 2018-04-18.
  2. ^ a b c "Brigade | Crunchbase". Crunchbase. Retrieved 2018-04-02.
  3. ^ "Follow Brigade on Index.co". Index.co. Retrieved 2018-04-02.
  4. ^ "Sean Parker's Brigade App Enters Private Beta As A Dead-Simple Way Of Taking Political Positions – TechCrunch". techcrunch.com. Retrieved 2018-04-02.
  5. ^ a b c d "Loomio | Crunchbase". Crunchbase. Retrieved 2018-04-02.
  6. ^ "loomio/loomio". GitHub. Retrieved 2018-04-02.
  7. ^ "loomio/loomio". GitHub. Retrieved 2018-04-02.
  8. ^ "Out in the Open: Occupy Wall Street Reincarnated as Open Source Software". WIRED. Retrieved 2018-04-02.
  9. ^ a b c d e "Democracy Earth Foundation. | Crunchbase". Crunchbase. Retrieved 2018-04-02.
  10. ^ "A Conversation With DemocracyOS, The YC Non-Profit That Built A Latin American Political Party – TechCrunch". techcrunch.com. Retrieved 2018-04-02.
  11. ^ "DemocracyOS/democracyos". GitHub. Retrieved 2018-04-02.
  12. ^ "DemocracyOS/democracyos". GitHub. Retrieved 2018-04-02.
  13. ^ "Web site a pork hunting ground / It joins others aiding analysis of bills for 'earmark' signs". SFGate. Retrieved 2018-04-02.
  14. ^ "Joshua Tauberer's Homepage". razor.occams.info. Retrieved 2018-04-02.
  15. ^ "https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/govtrack-us#section-overview". www.crunchbase.com. Retrieved 2018-04-02. {{cite web}}: External link in |title= (help)
  16. ^ "govtrack/civic-impulse-llc". GitHub. Retrieved 2018-04-02.
  17. ^ "govtrack/govtrack.us-web". GitHub. Retrieved 2018-04-02.
  18. ^ a b "Fluicity". angel.co. Retrieved 2018-04-07.
  19. ^ "Fluicity". www.facebook.com. Retrieved 2018-04-07.
  20. ^ "Fluicity | Crunchbase". Crunchbase. Retrieved 2018-04-23.
  21. ^ a b c d "Hustle | Crunchbase". Crunchbase. Retrieved 2018-04-22.
  22. ^ a b c d "Capitol Bells | Crunchbase". Crunchbase. Retrieved 2018-04-11.
  23. ^ a b c d "NGP VAN | Crunchbase". Crunchbase. Retrieved 2018-04-11.
  24. ^ "Etopia News L.A. talks with Andreas Nitsche | Interaktive Demokratie". www.interaktive-demokratie.org. Retrieved 2018-04-22.
  25. ^ a b "Information Kit (PDF)" (PDF).
  26. ^ "LiquidFeedback - The democracy software". liquidfeedback.org. Retrieved 2018-04-22.
  27. ^ a b c "Series C - OpenGov - 2017-05-16 | Crunchbase". Crunchbase. Retrieved 2018-04-23.
  28. ^ "OpenGov". GitHub. Retrieved 2018-04-23.
  29. ^ a b c "TurboVote | Crunchbase". Crunchbase. Retrieved 2018-04-11.
  30. ^ "Democracy Works: Democracy Fund". www.democracyfund.org. Retrieved 2018-04-11.
  31. ^ a b c d "About iSideWith.com". iSideWith. Retrieved 2018-04-18.
  32. ^ Boutelier, Nick. "LinkedIn".
  33. ^ a b "WhiteHouse/petitions". GitHub. Retrieved 2018-04-23.
  34. ^ a b c "Voatz | Crunchbase". Crunchbase. Retrieved 2018-04-19.
  35. ^ "Voatz". angel.co. Retrieved 2018-04-19.
  36. ^ "blacktreebird/voatz". GitHub. Retrieved 2018-04-19.
  37. ^ "Seed Round - Voatz - 2018-01-08 | Crunchbase". Crunchbase. Retrieved 2018-04-19.
  38. ^ Adida, Marneffe, Pereira, Quisquater, Ben, Olivier, Olivier, Jean-Jacques. "Electing a University President using Open-Audit Voting: Analysis of real-world use of Helios" (PDF).{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  39. ^ a b "benadida/helios-server". GitHub. Retrieved 2018-04-23.
  40. ^ "U-Report: Ilhasoft's application for Unicef - Ilhasoft". Ilhasoft. 2016-01-12. Retrieved 2018-04-23.
  41. ^ "U-report application revolutionizes social mobilization, empowering Ugandan youth". UNICEF. Retrieved 2018-04-23.
  42. ^ a b "rapidpro/ureport". GitHub. Retrieved 2018-04-23.
  43. ^ a b c "WB Maji Voice Policy Note" (PDF).
  44. ^ "CustomerFeedbackSystem/code". GitHub. Retrieved 2018-04-23.
  45. ^ a b c d "SecureVote". Techboard. 2017-04-26. Retrieved 2018-04-19.
  46. ^ "muminoff/securevote". GitHub. Retrieved 2018-04-19.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Aurabarrera/sandbox&oldid=1067497776"