Tentative plan for QuestionTime home page
Micah Sifry
I've been consulting with Mike Moffo on this and we're close to
deciding to go with the following plan for hosting and spreading the
petition:
We're going to put the primary page on Change.org, a nonpartisan hub
for social change activism. See
http://www.change.org/actions/view/demand_question_time
(We can shorten that url to http://bit.ly/demandQT, for tweeting and
other purposes...note that is case-sensitive...and we'll also use the
Facebook group that Mike set up)
Why using Change.org to host the petition works nicely:
We can add names of prime signers by editing the text.
The page shows a running total of who signed, along with the most
recent public signers.
Each time someone signs the petition a message actually gets emailed
to Obama, Boehner and McConnell.
Any signer can edit the message before they hit send.
Anyone can embed a widget urging people to sign on.
We can message the list from the change.org platform (to get the
actual list, I would have to show this as being sponsored by PdF or
TechPresident, which I think we ruled out, right?*)
We can insert a logo and also show the video of the Obama-GOP event
from last Friday.
A few other notes:
1. The petition will be open to anyone on the site, and if it gains
popularity it will appear under the "Popular" tabs for "Today" or
"This Week," and gain additional organic signatures from active
members beyond those who come to the site specifically to sign the
petition. Change.org has about 500K unique members who make use of the
site, by the way.
2. The stream of signatures below the petition is organized to be
reverse chronological by default, but it will prioritize signatures
from people who have photos on the site - so we might have people who
were more recent signatories but don't have a photo appear below the
people who signed earlier in the day but have a photo. Also, when
you're logged in you first see all of your friends who signed.
3. The petition will also pull in all the tweets that link to it
and have this appear under a tab right next to the signature. They
use Topsy for this, and for some reason they don't always accurately
get 100% of the tweets that link to it, but it's a decent
approximation and looks pretty cool.
4. People will actually automatically be prompted to tweet it after
they sign the petition (the prompt shows them links to Twitter, FB,
and Email). We can customize the default text for that (currently the
default would be "Take Action @change: Demand Question Time http://bit.ly/xyz").
5. Anyone who signs a petition will receive Change.org's weekly
action alert on behalf of a nonprofit partner, which they can
unsubscribe to with one click at any point. (Ben Rattray, their CEO,
comments "There's no petition tool I know of that doesn't sign up
users to receive something similar, and we've started limiting email
that goes to anyone who just signs a single petition.")
6. Ben is a good friend and will be responsive on fixes or
glitches...and he says his staff supports this cause and will also
help promote it via the site...
So, all in all, I think we should use Change.org as the home for this,
plus Facebook as discussed prior.
Micah
* Does anyone think we *should* make this a techPresident or PdF-
sponsored project on Change.org, in order to get the full email
functionality?
Clay Shirky
change.org homepage features a list of causes I would be hard-pressed
to call non-partisan.
-c
Micah Sifry
Sent from my iPhone
Ari Melber
Ari Melber
917-363-5213
Michael Moffo
But, with regard to the causes that Change.org supports, I would defer to our friends in this Google group that are from the R side of the aisle. Do y'all think it will be a deterrent to participation?
M>
Jon Henke
_______
Michael Turk
Clay Shirky
neutral URL like questiontime.wordpress.org ot equivalent.
-c
Mindy Finn
Rs. Change.org may pass for the early group of right-of-center folks
who have signed, but the first thing a Congressional aide will do is
review the site and assume it's a lefty cause.
I would assume Dem aides would do the same if this came from Newt's
American Solutions, for example.
Both orgs are technically bi-partisan, but with a history of strong
political leanings.
Micah Sifry
Anyone want to volunteer to set up an alternative site?
http://www.personaldemocracy.com
http://www.techpresident.com
http://micah.sifry.com
http://www.twitter.com/mlsif
Clay Shirky
'demandquestiontime.foo.com' format?
-c
da...@aol.com
In other news, today at the White House press briefing, Gibbs said that Obama had accepted an invitation to talk to the Senate GOPers. But there were no details as to when and whether the session would include #questiontime and be televised.
DC
From: Clay Shirky <cl...@shirky.com>
To: question...@googlegroups.com
Sent: Mon, Feb 1, 2010 6:01 pm
Subject: Re: Tentative plan for QuestionTime home page
Micah Sifry
Micah Sifry
Glenn Reynolds
Clay Shirky
> I'd go with demandquestiontime.com -- it's clear, easy to remember
second
Micah Sifry
da...@aol.com
From: Micah Sifry <msi...@gmail.com>
To: question...@googlegroups.com
Sent: Mon, Feb 1, 2010 7:34 pm
Subject: Re: Tentative plan for QuestionTime home page
Glenn Reynolds
Michael Turk
Micah Sifry
Micah
Jon Henke
_______
Michael Moffo
Agree with what has been said via email. Will catch up with Micah
later tonight.
But, more generally, I will of course, remind everyone that time (and
relevance) is of the essence.
M
Sent from my iPhone
Clay Shirky
> I move that Micah is an excellent fellow and we are all lucky that he's
> around. I'm guessing this will have unanimous consent.
Could we say 'fortunate he's around', instead of 'lucky'?
-c
susanc...@gmail.com
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
Harold Pollack
On Feb 2, 5:34 am, susancrawf...@gmail.com wrote:
> Thanks to Micah.
> Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Micah Sifry <msi...@gmail.com>
> Date: Mon, 1 Feb 2010 23:11:56
> To: <question...@googlegroups.com>
> Subject: Re: Tentative plan for QuestionTime home page
>
> I have called in the cavalry, a.k.a. my smarter little brother. We own
> demandquestiontime.com and are working on the wordpress install and petition
> plug-in. Hopefully I'll have a basic site to work with tomorrow...can't say
> how well it will look, design-wise. Expect an update on status around noon.
>
> Micah
>
> On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 11:01 PM, Michael Turk <t...@kungfuquip.com> wrote:
>
> > He absolutely does. It would have been easy enough to simply charge ahead,
> > but it's well worth it. I think the benefit in terms of getting support from
> > the right will show that.
> > ------------------------------
> > *From: * da...@aol.com
> > *Date: *Mon, 01 Feb 2010 22:59:18 -0500
> > *To: *<question...@googlegroups.com>
> > *Subject: *Re: Tentative plan for QuestionTime home page
>
> > In response to the reasonable concerns raised on the right about using
> > the change site, Micah has agreed to spend a chunk of time tomorrow trying
> > to set up a stand-alone site for demandquestiontime.com. I think that is
> > quite swell of him. And we owe him our thanks.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Micah Sifry <msi...@gmail.com>
> > To: question...@googlegroups.com
> > Sent: Mon, Feb 1, 2010 7:34 pm
> > Subject: Re: Tentative plan for QuestionTime home page
>
> > That's the working plan.
>
> > On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 10:32 PM, Clay Shirky <c...@shirky.com> wrote:
>
> >> On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 9:42 PM, Glenn Reynolds <glenn.reyno...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> > I'd go with demandquestiontime.com -- it's clear, easy to remember
>
> >> second
>
> >> -c
>
> >> > On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 9:28 PM, Micah Sifry <msi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> >> Both demandQT.com and demandquestiontime.com are available.
>
> >> >> On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 9:01 PM, Clay Shirky <c...@shirky.com> wrote:
>
> >> >>> is WP hosting all that's needed? do we own a url, or will we be in
> >> >>> 'demandquestiontime.foo.com' format?
>
> >> >>> -c
>
> >> >>> On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 8:57 PM, Micah Sifry <msi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >>> > OK <sigh>, siting this on Change.org is vetoed.
>
> >> >>> > Anyone want to volunteer to set up an alternative site?
>
> >> >>> > On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 8:35 PM, Mindy Finn <mindyf...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
>
> >> >>> >> I think this a must if we want the petition to be taken seriously
> >> by
> >> >>> >> Rs.
> >> >>> >> Change.org may pass for the early group of right-of-center folks
> >> who
> >> >>> >> have
> >> >>> >> signed, but the first thing a Congressional aide will do is review
> >> the
> >> >>> >> site
> >> >>> >> and assume it's a lefty cause.
>
> >> >>> >> I would assume Dem aides would do the same if this came from Newt's
> >> >>> >> American Solutions, for example.
>
> >> >>> >> Both orgs are technically bi-partisan, but with a history of strong
> >> >>> >> political leanings.
>
> >> >>> >> On Feb 1, 2010, at 8:26 PM, Clay Shirky <c...@shirky.com> wrote:
>
> >> >>> >>> The alternative is probably self-hosting it, or hosting at a more
> >> >>> >>> neutral URL like questiontime.wordpress.org ot equivalent.
>
> >> >>> >>> -c
>
> >> >>> >>> On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 8:13 PM, Jon Henke <jonhe...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
>
> >> >>> >>>> It probably would be, to some extent, but what is the
> >> alternative?
>
> >> >>> >>>>_______
> >> >>> >>>> Jon Henke
>
> >> >>> >>>> On Feb 1, 2010, at 6:40 PM, Michael Moffo wrote:
> >> >>> >>>> I'm less concerned about using the word in our petition/letter
> >> >>> >>>> (change
> >> >>> >>>> might
> >> >>> >>>> be an '08 buzz word for D's, but will obviously be a '10 buzz
> >> word
> >> >>> >>>> for
> >> >>> >>>> R's).
>
> >> >>> >>>> But, with regard to the causes that Change.org supports, I would
> >> >>> >>>> defer
> >> >>> >>>> to
> >> >>> >>>> our friends in this Google group that are from the R side of the
> >> >>> >>>> aisle.
> >> >>> >>>> Do
> >> >>> >>>> y'all think it will be a deterrent to participation?
>
> >> >>> >>>> M>
>
> >> >>> >>>> On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 5:51 PM, Ari Melber <amel...@gmail.com>
> >> >>> >>>> wrote:
>
> >> >>> >>>>> I weighed in earlier on language that "change" has become a
> >> defacto
> >> >>> >>>>> partisan word, so the effort should steer clear of that whenever
> >> >>> >>>>> possible.
> >> >>> >>>>> FWIW.
>
> >> >>> >>>>> Ari Melber
> >> >>> >>>>> 917-363-5213
>
> >> >>> >>>>> On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 5:37 PM, Micah Sifry <msi...@gmail.com>
> >> >>> >>>>> wrote:
>
> >> >>> >>>>>> Fair question.
>
> >> >>> >>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>
> >> >>> >>>>>> On Feb 1, 2010, at 5:33 PM, Clay Shirky <c...@shirky.com>
> >> wrote:
>
> >> >>> >>>>>>> I hate to ask this, but is "Change" a stop-word for
> >> Republicans?
> >> >>> >>>>>>> The
> >> >>> >>>>>>> change.org homepage features a list of causes I would be
> >> >>> >>>>>>> hard-pressed
> >> >>> >>>>>>> to call non-partisan.
>
> >> >>> >>>>>>> -c
>
> >> >>> >>>>>>> On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 4:19 PM, Micah Sifry <msi...@gmail.com
>
> >> >>> >>>>>>> wrote:
>
> >> >>> >>>>>>>> All:
>
> >> >>> >>>>>>>> I've been consulting with Mike Moffo on this and we're close
> >> to
> >> >>> >>>>>>>> deciding to go with the following plan for hosting and
> >> spreading
> >> >>> >>>>>>>> the
> >> >>> >>>>>>>> petition:
>
> >> >>> >>>>>>>> We're going to put the primary page on Change.org, a
> >> nonpartisan
> >> >>> >>>>>>>> hub
> >> >>> >>>>>>>> for social change activism. See
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>http://www.change.org/actions/view/demand_question_time
>
> >> >>> >>>>>>>> (We can shorten that url tohttp://bit.ly/demandQT, for
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -