Revisit statements to change vote as conversation is ongoing

[vinzent]

If a conversation is running für multiple days I might like to change my answer to some statements because new statements might have brought in some new perspectives and now my answer to some old isn't valid anymore.

Is this something that is not possible by design something that could be implemented?

[colinmegill]

@vinzent Thanks for bringing this up!

Correct, Polis doesn't currently allow this. If it did, seeing this behavior over time would certainly be interesting for downstream analysis.

We've discussed this over the years and yes, ideally, we'd like to allow this. The hangup has been where and how to do it. It seems likely it would be in a separate view, where participant can see list of all comments

[patcon]

Agree with both! I empathize with the desire to be VERY cautious about keeping low cognitive overhead and preventing manipulation.

Re: overhead. I often try to think of irl analogs for digital things, to find what natural "affordances" that might be added. So I'm thinking on a real convo here: when and how might I go back and revise certain statements in a real convo? Perhaps only when I see a friend/acquaintance with a diff perspective than mine, or when I hear what the larger group has agreed on.

Perhaps the UI might take cues from this. Never in a real conversation would I ever cycle through a list of every last position I'd taken, and reconsider them all. As you allude to Colin, that is perhaps quite unnatural and heavy. But perhaps the UI could reflect the nature of how we revise perspectives in irl conversations, not wholesale or en masse, but in reflection of the views of our partners, our friends, and the group as a whole. 🙂

[ThenWho]

+1 for more 'cyclical' conversations.

Right now it looks orthogonal to how polis works (i.e. monotonous, if slow, convergence towards consensus) but over time I'd like to see it becoming a tool for 'being together' - communities involved in an indirect dialog that never finishes, co-evolving their opinions, perceptions, goals, ...

[patcon]

Reflecting on Colin's (5) and my prior "affordance" thoughts:

"explore" carousel

Perhaps the ability to essentially say (maybe in the existing "explore" carousel): "ok, I've been convinced to agree with this statement though I was in disagreement before". This would essentially be only an option for majority opinions, and group consensus statements. A time-delay (e.g., only factored into viz/analysis after X many hours/days) could help resist abuse and probing.

I feel very cautious about this suggestion. A/B testing and smallest possible scope seem essential, assuming it's of interest

[colinmegill]

This intrinsically relates to whether the system is goal oriented, or not.

[patcon]

Can you elaborate on what goal you mean?

[patcon]

Related old ticket: #152