How Users Approve Issues

Does every suggested issue open for public comment?

No. Suggested issues must first go through the issue selection process. Only those approved by the user community can open for public comment.

What are the goals of the issue selection process?

To enable communities to democratically identify issues with potential to benefit the community.
To define standards which promote the quality of the issues and their deliberations on the website.
To help issue authors develop issues which benefit the community.

Why select issues?

Most Kitchen Democracy users do not want to receive announcements of biased issues with hidden agendas. Nor do they want to wade through incoherent or irrelevant issues on the website.

The issue selection process is a democratic rating process which ensures that only high quality issues are opened, on the 'open issues' section of the website. Users wishing to rate suggested issues can visit the suggestion box.

Why not set up an editorial board to filter out low quality issues?

Every person has biases and areas of knowledge and ignorance -- including members of an editorial board. Allowing a small group to select issues may limit the scope of issues presented on these forums. By defining clear standards and allowing the community to select issues, the selection process is democratic and inclusive of a wide range of knowledge and expertise.

What is the selection process?

Almost every issue starts in the suggestion box - where Kitchen Democracy users evaluate whether the issue is 'important', 'actionable', 'balanced' and/or 'clear'. Each rater assigns 0 to 3 points for each of those categories:

Rating	Points
No	0
Barely	1
Somewhat	2
Very	3

The deadline for suggesting issues and changing existing issue in the suggestion box is three days before the end of the current rating period. The deadline is posted on the suggestion box web page. Changes to existing issues will not be accepted during the three day period from the deadline to the end of the rating period.

At deadline, Kitchen Democracy invites users who have subscribed to announcements to help choose the next issue. An issue in the suggestion box by this deadline 'qualifies' to open for public comment if its average score at the end of the rating period exceeds the Qualification Threshold in each category 'Actionable', 'Balanced' and 'Clear'. The Qualification Thresholds are:

Category	Qualification Threshold
Actionable	1.9
Balanced	1.7
Clear	2.4

Only ratings of the current version of the issue are included in the average.

For example, issue X has been in the suggestion box since February 1, when the deadline was February 7. On February 7, invitations to choose the next issue are emailed, and by Feb 10, 20 users have rated it with average ratings 1.9, 1.6 and 2.5 in 'Actionable', 'Balanced' and 'Clear' respectively. Issue X does not qualify because neither 'Actionable' nor 'Balanced' exceed the qualification thresholds.

The author then proposes version 2 before the next deadline, March 1. On March 1, invitations are again emailed. By March 4, of the 20 users who rated version 1, 15 of them also rated version 2. In addition, 35 new raters rated the issue. Based on these 50 ratings, the average ratings for issue X are now 2.0, 1.8 and 2.5 - issue X now qualifies.

If more than one issue qualifies, the author of the qualified issue with the highest average 'Important' score will be notified via email shortly after the end of the rating period, and will have 24 hours to respond.

If that author does not respond, or declines to open, then the author of the qualified issue with the next highest average 'Important' score will be likewise notified.

This notification process continues through the qualified issues until the first author decides to open his/her issue.

New issues - or new versions of existing issues - put into the suggestion box after deadline will remain in the suggestion box for evaluation during the next rating period.

What makes an issue 'actionable'?

A year from now, will we be able to look back and say "X did it" - or "X did not do it," where X is the appropriate authority? Here are some examples:

Actionable	Not Actionable
Should City Council fund the "Better Than Drugs" program?	How can the city fight crime better?
Should the Mayor send a letter to the White House on behalf of our city urging the President to pull out of Iraq?	Should we pull out of Iraq?
Should City Council transfer $100,000 from the economic development department budget to the street lighting budget?	Should the city improve street lighting?

What makes an issue 'balanced'?

Does the issue author present both sides of the issue responsibly? Here are some examples:

Balanced	Not Balanced
Should clean elections be put on the ballot?	Should the city fight corruption by putting clean elections on the ballot?
An article with roughly the same quality and quantity of arguments presented for both sides.	An article with most of the arguments on one side.

What makes an issue 'clear'?

Can the average citizen with no special training understand the words? Are the words and sentences short, simple and without jargon? Here are some examples:

Clear	Not Clear
Should antibiotics be banned from milk sold in our city?	Shall section 103.004.2b of the Municipal Code be amended to prohibit the sale of milk containing antibiotics?
Should landlords be required to make large wood frame structures over garages more earthquake safe?	Shall we fix the soft story problem?
Should Jellybeans be allowed to remodel their back area into apartments without a Zoning Board hearing?	Should an administrative use permit suffice to convert 100 Main St. into a mixed-use building?

Who rates an issue?

Any Kitchen Democracy user living within the issue's community can rate it. The more users who rate an issue, the more we draw on the combined strengths, knowledge, and experience of the community.

Which issues can bypass the suggestion phase and launch directly in the open phase?

Issues for communities which have less than fifty Kitchen Democracy users. These are new communities which have not yet gained enough users to ensure a quality issue selection process. Kitchen Democracy staff will work directly with issue authors in these communities to ensure their issues meet the above standards.

How frequently are issues advanced to open phase?

At the end of each rating period, one issue (at most) advances to the open phase per the selection process above. The rating period is approximately two to four weeks.

When do users rate suggested issues?

Users can rate suggested issues at any time. In practice, most ratings are made during the first 36 hours after the deadline.

What happens to issues which do not open for public comment?

Usually they remain in the suggestion box and have another chance to open for public comment at the end of the next rating period. However, certain issues may be removed from the suggestion box in two cases:

If, at the end of a rating period, an issue fails to qualify, and the issue author does not suggest a new version by the deadline of the next rating period, that issue will be removed at that deadline.
If more than six issues remain in the suggestion box at deadline, then those issues are ranked by average rating in the 'Important' category as of the end of the then current rating period. The lowest ranked among them are removed until six of those issues remain.

Who can read the ratings?

The ratings and suggestions for improvement are only available to the issue author, and the identity of the rater will remain anonymous.

A few people state their position while rating suggested issues. Why don't you show that tally?

The tally and statements for issues in the suggestion box are only available to the issue author. The tally and statements are made available to the general public only after issues have opened for public comment.

Issue authors use feedback - ratings, suggestions, the tally and statements - from the suggestion box to modify and improve their issues. During this phase, the issue is only a draft: it often contains errors and bias. Until the issue author has had a chance to stabilize and balance the issue and correct errors, it is inappropriate for a public comment process to influence community decisions.

I see a suggested issue is utter nonsense. What should I do?

Give it low ratings - and consider giving the author constructive suggestions for improvement.

What about ties?

If multiple issues tie for top scores, the oldest issue is given priority. If multiple issues tie for lowest score and issues need to be culled, the oldest issue(s) are removed.

Will this issue selection process change?

Probably. It is experimental and Kitchen Democracy will need to tweak it to maximize the quality of the issues and their deliberations. However, the most current version of the process will always be documented here.

Top