Here is what I think – the open call required people to reveal their identity to be part of the process. Some people aren’t comfortable with revealing their identity completely online. I am one such person. While I do not attempt to hide my identity – like if I meet you at a conference, I’ll tell you my real name and where I blog – I would like to blog with this alias online. Why? I feel the name Ian Timothy has more meaning than my given name at this phase of my life.
But I digress.
I am not sure if I get everything Darkness is saying but this is one bit I think I understand – there needs to be a way for people who want to be anonymous to contribute to the process.
The way the proposal was drafted required people to meet in person to discuss the issues. Is there a way we can do it online?
I have always been a strong believer that the nature of anything is heavily influenced, if not determined, by the nature of its beginnings. Likewise, this proposal and its subsequent impact on the online community will be affected by how it was drafted whether or not the government implements it.
A potential problem with an online process with anonymous contributors is that when you allow everyone to play, things can go down the shit hole pretty fast – pretty much like the Internet as it currently is. One of the main points of this proposal is that the community can take care of itself if not learn how to take care of itself.
Like the people drafting the proposal, I believe with freedom, possibly even in spite of it, as a community (i.e. Singaporeans who blog) we can grow to be more responsible.
So why not put it to the test? Can the community come together in the actual environment we are trying to regulate or rather deregulate and draft a proposal regarding these issues.
To use popular Web 2.0 terminology – can we open-source and crowd-source this process.