Open Government Dialogue
« Back To OpenGov - Open Government Brainstorm

colingallagher

User Profile Image colingallagher
Member since : May-22-2009 (Verified)
1 Ideas, 10 Comments, 168 Votes

User Activity Stream

Ideas Posted

Looking at the site, there are way too many repeats of ideas, not only on the birth certificate issue but also on health insurance, marijuana, and some other issues.
It seems like there are some people who are purposefully trying to subvert the intention of this site -- just what happened during the initial process when the Citizens' Briefing Book was first opened, when a gigantic group of "pro-UFO disclosure" types decided each and every one of them was going to post their own version of the same idea... a little different each time, but with one similarity: they wanted Obama to "disclose all information about UFOs" or "do something about" the "UFO issue." This birth certificate thing is no different, it is an interest group that has posted the "birth certificate idea" on every category and subcategory of this site without respect or consideration for the actual purpose of the Open Government Dialogue and without regard for the obvious categories of ideas. Ultimately these "birth certificate disclosure" folks are being allowed to dominate discussions because:
-There is no requirement that users who create a login must "agree" or "agree to acknowledge" the purpose of the site before they create a post.
-There seems to be no active moderation. Posted comments appear almost instantly. I have not posted an idea yet of my own, but based on what I am observing, I am guessing that there is no moderation of ideas either.
This results in me making the following suggestion through submittal of this idea:
1) All users should be required to login (I think this has recently happened)
2) All users should be required to acknowlede the purpose of the site -- a) before entry and b) especially before posting a new idea.
3) There must be active moderation at least for the posting of ideas. New ideas should be briefly reviewed by a moderator or moderators in order to make it onto the site, otherwise you are going to have people posting about UFOs or anything they want in the Transparency-Making Data More Accessible category, or even in the Participation subcategories, or anywhere. People need to accept the idea of having their ideas pass through a moderator before the idea appears on the site.
Also, there are way too many people insulting each other in posted comments using both mild and seriously derogatory terms. People are also insulting governmental employees and officers in seriously derogatory ways. Such posts (ideas or comments) are unprofessional and should be weeded out by a moderator.
Displaying 1 - 25 of 4205 Ideas
12345678910….168169Next »

Comments Posted

colingallagher 9 months ago
Obviously this idea I have posted (which is the first and only idea I will post here) is getting voted down by people who want to post ideas about birth certificates, UFOs, and other single-issue concepts (including health insurance, by the way) that have nothing to do with the purpose of this site. I no longer view moderation as feasible while the site is constantly under attack by people who are subverting the purpose of the site. Therefore I have recommended that the comment period be closed for phase 1 of the Open Government Dialogue. Originally the comment period was already scheduled to be closed at least several days ago but the government held it open longer to allow people more time to comment. This was clearly an error as someone decided to take advantage of the extended comment period to post ideas completely unrelated to new and innovative concepts for making government more transparent, inclusive, etc., and instead many of you have decided to post birth certificate comments in every category and subcategory of this site -- comments and "ideas" that are in fact, repetitive. There are probably hundreds of posted "ideas" on the birth certificate issue alone from at least a hundred different users (I am guessing, based on what I have observed in the various categories of the site). If someone has posted an idea (including a birth certificate idea) it should not be replicated a hundred times over. The purpose of this site was supposed to be to find new ideas from the public that follow the categories and subcategories. If someone wanted to post an "idea" about UFOs, birth certificates, health insurance, marijuana, or some other single-issue thing (as opposed to a real principle or concept which would facilitate openness in government if used as a rule or guidance by the federal government), then the idea should be posted -- once -- in the category referred to as "Uncategorized." How sad that so many people have not seen the true purpose of this site is to develop principles and concepts that can be used to make government more accesible -- and used to make government a type of organization that can be more readily influenced by you, its constituent(s) -- and so in flooding the site with repetitive ideas (different wording in each idea posted, but the same sort of thing, be it birth certificates, UFOs or other issues) you have forgotten the site's purpose and whether intentionally or not, you have subverted the site's purpose. It is very sad to see this destructive sort of action. I hope you all see the error of your ways.
colingallagher 9 months ago
This birth certificate idea has nothing to do with suggesting principles and concepts for open government, transparency, etc. -- The birth certificate idea is a single issue item, not a principle. If you want openness in government, suggest or vote on principles that actually would be broadly applied in government, don't focus on single issues such as birth certificates of elected officials, etc. The birth certificate 'idea' has nothing to do with the purpose of this site. Go ahead and flag me now if you disagree but I stand by what I am saying here. You know the purpose of this site and it is not to promote single issues, it is to post and discuss principles.
colingallagher 9 months ago
Re. powers enumerated in the U.S. Constitution / Amendments, having federal government help or facilitate positive and transparent interactions, dialogue, etc., that local government would implement, or having federal/state/local government mix perspectives and communicate with each other better, or having a federal program of engagement which would -- as suggested by the person who created the idea we are commenting on -- "develop a set of Open government principles that may be adopted by local governments" (see item 1 in the idea we are commenting on above) - and having best practices, seals of approval, award programs, etc. -- None of this is unconstitutional at all.
stan.sso cited our Constitutional language: ""The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." But engagement is not the exercise of "powers." It is, at the most basic level, a process which involves a series of activities that foster communication and involvement between citizens, government, and various groups in society that may not normally interact, but need to communicate with each other. -- de Toqueville saw it happening when he visited the United States, the notion of social capital was developed by a teacher in the early 1900s, civic engagement discussions about what it means have been going on for many years, notably involving such persons as Putnam, Peterson, Heierbacher, and may others, but one thing that civic engagement and public engagement are not is unconstitutional. Don't even go there, what a crazy argument. Next you will say that my posting here is unconstitutional?! No, it's simply part of the civic engagement process. Communicate. Engage. Live and let live. And learn while you are at it.
colingallagher 9 months ago
As part of my submittal to the Citizens' Briefing Book some time ago I submitted an idea almost exactly like this one which got, by the end of voting, somewhere between 3800 and 4000 points (with each vote in favor giving it 10 points, each vote against taking away 10 points, and so on). My idea was to take USASpending.gov, which was a concept developed by then-Senator Obama -- now our President -- and to refine it by breaking out the various things into general categories (such as "defense") and allowing things to be broken down into visual subcategories showing total expenditures, so that each drop-down from the larger category would reveal smaller categories, smaller offices and divisions, and so on. And for each there should be a public comment and voting area so that people can literally comment on the budget over the course of the year (although there should be a date where voting and commenting stops each year to give the government time to digest all the data and comments submitted by the public, before they get into making decisions about the next fiscal year...)
colingallagher 9 months ago
This is absolutely correct. In most government organizations I have worked in, there are a few people who unfortunately are thought of as "renegades" who more often than not have to work well behind the scenes through a myriad of connections and informal channels in order to get anything done at all, because those who have the greater power in the formal hierarchy more often than not don't want to move on the so-called "renegades'" ideas. It would be better if there was a transparent and open way (for example, like this Open Government Dialogue site) for state and local governments, as well as federal agencies, to foster and encourage the work of people who have long been marginalized, ideally through some sort of cloudware application like the one you are using right now.
colingallagher 9 months ago
Regarding the comment by espalding_bbr above, you are correct, it is absolutely critical for State government as well as local governments! Imagine how different things might have been where I live here in California if the State had used a dialogue site like this one we are using now to generate ideas and get a sense of the public feeling _before_ putting Propositions 1A-1F on the ballot. I imagine that if the California State government had done this, at least some if not most of Propositions 1A-1E never would have gone on the ballot at all, and other more viable ballot propositions would have been floated to the voters -- and today, California's State government would not be in the unenviable position of trying to figure out how to deal with 20 billion dollars of deficit before the June 15 State Constitutional deadline! Imagine the positive power of dialogue (online and in-person) for correcting such problems -- preventatively.
colingallagher 9 months ago
This is great. Absolutely fantastic idea. Here's why I think so ... I took an Organizational Analysis and Development class from Prof. Felix Marten as part of my Executive Master of Public Administration coursework at Golden Gate University and it really opened my eyes to what organizational culture actually is and what it can become. There are some very serious cultural implications once you realize how the formation of organizations tie in to culture and this realization enables you to see through the murky waters to the clarity of purpose you need if you want to begin a change process ~ or at least successfully explore the potential for change. If you haven't already, check out Edgar H. Schein's work on the subject - absolutely fantastic book, called Organizational Culture and Leadership.
Sample the book at the below link for free on Google before buying (best price is on Amazon.com) -- but trust me, it is well worth every cent.
http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=xhmezDokfnYC&oi=fnd&pg=PR11&dq=%22Schein%22+%22Organizational+culture+and+leadership%22+&ots=m4IT3Mm4nI&sig=YBjnVwEJx-Eh_GOE5BRDC5l8ESk
colingallagher 9 months ago
This is a good idea. There would have to be some clear rules set up about timing, involvement of volunteers to help with outreach and information gathering, lots of training, and many other factors to consider. I am interested to see how this plays out in King County, Washington ~ I have heard a few good and interesting things about it even though I live south of Washington here in California.
colingallagher 9 months ago
Greg, I appreciate that in the past you have contacted me about the availability of a grant for City-level local government to enable utilization of WorldLingo. I support this idea. However, it never advanced -- there was diminishing interest in it at a management level, possibly because of a perception that the English to Spanish translation might not be adequate if it were automated, and because of a perception (which I believe t be incorrect) that Spanish speakers would not use the web. I find that an increasing number of primarily Spanish speakers are using the web - in internet cafes and on web-enabled 3G phones, actually, and most of them are young (juniors or seniors in high school, and college or university students, usually).
colingallagher 9 months ago
Just for clarification, I have now developed a username on this site and the posts above shown as posted by "colingallagher" are posts I have made. This is my first post using a login with userid and password, those above I did not post using a login.