The intro essay is the only thing that makes sense on this page.
- So, of course, sysops delete it, and trolls restore it.
Thankfully it contains links to all the good starting points. So maybe what's needed is just to divide up by advocate, developer, designer roles? So that we figure out what people can do for Consumerium, and send them to the right place?
- hmmh. hmmh. Thanks. True. Aren't developer and designer the same thing in practice? Shouldn't that be the other way around?
- They're the same only in bad practice. Three different roles. The advocate figures out what's important, the developer responds in code, the designer responds in design and changes to the user model.
- Why should the person who chooses the words "Main Page, Recent changes, View discussion", layout and other aspects of the user interface be the same as the person hacking the code? In general the two skill sets are totally different. Bad user interfaces like say TikiWiki come from setting up stupid development cycles where if you can't talk like a developer, you can't be heard about the user interface. Why do you think Microsoft rules the soft-world? Because they have Program Managers to design things and mock them up, and Project Managers to deliver them in good debugged code. There's nothing in common except the "look and feel" between the two jobs.
- A good guide to how to lay out a main page for a meta type discussion like this is at http://meta.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page_style - this style is expressed for Meta-Wikipedia in http://meta.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page_Neutral which is sort of the "users' main page". A Main Page *HAS TO* give a concrete and specific understanding of a project, and it *HAS TO* provide clear visible up-front links to the values and concepts of the project. Look at *ANY* non-profit organization's page. They do *NOT* open with all the wonderful technology they are going to use... or a vague mission statement. They open with very specific stories and images.
Shouldn't this be linked from the Main Page as "Consumerium Services" or something?
Brief Introduction to The Concept of Consumerium
From the consumption perspective Consumerium is about enabling a shift from affective buying behaviour based on illusions to affective buying behaviour based on information on the social and environmental impacts of the production and naturally the perceived quality of the product.
We hope to achieve this by building two, consumer accessible, complementary facilities:
- The Content Wiki where we hope people will build an abundance of neutral information about products and their production processes and all involved factors. The integrity of this information will be negotiated and upheld by peer review in a similar manner as in Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia and furthermore by maintaining a backend data storage called The Consumerium Vault which mostly validates the existance or non-existance of things the articles in The Content Wiki claim to refer to. The goal of the Content Wiki is to be objective.
- The Consumerium Exchange or The Opinion Wiki - Where strictly formed datastructures are used to record, archive and enable the aggregation of information on the popularity of different opinions, mostly in the form of competing campaigns on issues related to production and consumption. The Consumerium Exchange is very rigid internally, but the view it provides to consumers and producers alike is very fluid and based on ones subjective preferences.
Both of these facilities will be accessible through the Internet, but we hope to work together with the retailers of the world, who seek an competitive advantage by providing a better shopping experience for their clients, to bring access to the shelf front via short-range wireless connections, optimally Bluetooth, for zero cost to the consumer.
- "Bluetooth" is not "zero cost". It costs money to buy hardware and more money to keep it up to date. Also wireless services usually cost money. The cheapest devices to do this would certainly not be Bluetooth but dumber analog FM or other RF devices. Don't "Require" hardware that isn't required.
- Well the original concept was rather technology-centered and I can see your point in your argument but looking at it from where I stand bluetooth is a very essential technology because it allows anonymous (from v1.2 on) and secure access to information resources in close physical range which of course is a terribly essential thing. I mean that consumerium isn't worth building at all if the consumer as a human can't be protected from things like company, corporation, advertisement agency or algorithms made by any of the previous or whatever other no body
...to be continued...
It is one of several essential projects that will make moral purchasing a daily reality. Consumerium focuses this moral purchasing power.
Advice will probably be seen by the end user as a red/yellow/green light traffic-type signal, or as a score easily translated into a price premium, or as a note in Simple English about issues with, or merits of, the product. All rely on opinion wiki comments compiled by software using a wikitext standard. Semantic link standards may be required also.
In any case, the release of this advice is keyed to bar codes, and may rely on frequently updated data embedded in hand-held devices, and/or dynamic retrieval via short-range wireless to the shelf front. Where possible, reasons for making buying decisions, or refusing a certain product, will go as feedback to the producers. This will enhance the consumer experience, advance product development and keep this planet as hospitable as possible for human and other natural life.
The alternative, of course, is for us all to be blissfully ignorant.