To Alejandro Ponce (cc: OpenGovMetrics email-group),
It would be nice if you could share some of the feedback that you have
been getting on the
Justice Project's new "Open Government Index"
Although I have seen some reactions, those postings are unconnected
(and/or lack an option for commenting) and, so, they do not really
constitute a discussion.
Therefore, it seems that this topic is exactly the type that would
benefit from an open and public discussion
, here on the
( where each posting is archived
for public reference; Google membership is not
As the group's Moderator, I will hold back on my thoughts, for now, and
let you give us a sense of your reaction to the feedback that you have
been receiving. You may, of course, refer to the specific language
as contained in a person's public postings online.
And then, if those authors (or others) respond here to your posting, then
we might actually participate in an open and public discussion
i.e., that "other" aspect of open government. (!)
To get that discussion started, please tell us what you think of two
that were posted today on
To submit a response for posting
- FreedomInfo.org - Update, April 9, 2015
- Commentary: Read two reactions to the World Justice
Project's™ new Open Government Index.
Helen Darbishire writes that the methodology is skewed by its
broad definition of requests for information.
Ben Worthy finds the results "fascinating" and
raises questions about some of the results.
to the OpenGovMetrics
email-group, just "Reply All" to this message.
, any person wanting to be sure NOT to miss
messages on this, or other discussions involving the evaluation of
efforts, can join the email-group by sending a blank
(instructions to "leave the group" are included
in every posting).
Stephen Buckley, moderator
Cape Cod, Massachusetts, USA