- The document describes an online electronic parliament platform called PAR.EL.ON that aims to integrate direct democracy solutions from 20 years of eDemocracy experiments. - It discusses design principles for an intuitive user interface, accessibility features, security measures, and mechanisms to reduce domination by active users. - The legislative process involves proposal drafting, commission review, public comment periods, and voting, with real-time notifications and integrated open source editing tools.

1. PARLAMENTO ELETTRONICO ONLINE
Design Principles
Roma, 19 Settembre 2013
Presentation by Emanuele Sabetta, Project Leader

2. PAR.EL.ON.
• A Free and Open Source Platform for Direct Democracy
• It integrates solutions that are the product of 20 years of
eDemocracy experiments all over the world.
• Completely based on Open Standards (Akoma Ntoso, XBRL,
LegalRuleML, EuroVoc, etc.).
• Currently in development since September 2012 by volunteers on
the initiative of the elected Councillor Davide Barillari (M5S Lazio,
Italy)

3. USER INTERFACE
Designed to Maximize Usability and Accessibility

4. INTUITIVE RECOGNITION OF INTERACTIVE ELEMENTS INTHE PAGE
Big Buttons with 3D look to be easily
distinguished from the plane of the page,
sized for touch devices.
Graphic Language For UI Interaction
( curved = interactive , sharp corners = static )
Abandonment of Underscore as a Link Indicator

5. Reduced the number of choices per page to a minimum, while maintaining a levels of
nesting below 5.
Breakdown of User Stories of Liquid Feedback in its
atomic elements and restructuring these sequences in a
simpler Step-by-Step actions like those of an ATM
terminal.
Una Pagina = Una Scelta

6. •Use of very readable sans serif fonts and very LARGE sizes ( Oregon LDO )
!
•Use of large SUMMARY labels that accompany the data or the options displayed and which
highlight the contents in a concise way.
!
•At any time and in any page the user must be able to read in clearWHERE HE IS ,WHAT
CAN HE DO and HOWTO GO BACK
!
•In case of time related parameters (for example knowing at what stage you are in the
legislative iter) we add a time bar or phases bar with a moving arrow that will show where in
time or at what stage the user is.
ACCESSIBILITY FOR ALL CITIZENS

7. Introduction of
Commissions of Experts
•Solves the Problem of the "Government of the
Incompetents" raised by Plato
!
•Technical Commissions Reports allow citizens to
provide "informed consent" when they vote a
law proposal, ensuring that users are aware of all
the risks and benefits deriving from approving it.
!
•Legal and Financial Commissions provides a
report of feasibility but can also propose fixes
and modifications to the draft bill that users
must approve with another vote.
!
•Neutrality Guaranteed by "Randomized Shifts" of
members at each convocation.

8. LEGISLATIVE ITER PHASES BAR
• Most of the problems of comprehensibility in Liquid Feedback derived from the
non-immediate understanding of the complex life cycle of a proposal.
• We added a phases bar that associates a set of boxes representing the stages of
the legislative iter.
• A moving arrow above the boxes allows you to see immediately at what stage
you are in, what you do at the current stage, and what will be the next step.

9. EVENT NOTIFICATION SYSTEM
Another problem evidenced by the Liquid Feedback experience is the user
difficulty in following all the events happening and the changes made to the
proposals.
In LF there was no way to figure out changes to the text or who made
those changes, and to list the new proposals or the new amendments
introduced since the last logout.
!
We introduced a notification system you can subscribe for each proposal,
with indicators of the type of event and the author of modifications, that
allows the user to get immediately an idea of the new things that need to
be examined and to keep track of the new amendments.

10. KEYWORDS AND LABELS
•Introduction of Standard Keywords (Teseo, EuroVoc, GeoNames... ) associated with the Proposals and
Issues , to make it easier to catalog and to search them.
!
•Introduction of Competencies Labels associated with the Proposals and the Issues.Those tags indicate all
theTechnical Areas of Expertise needed to evaluate an issue or a proposal, making easier to understand
the type of technical background necessary to assess the validity of the proposals, allowing the citizens
with such expertise to pick the proposals in which they can contribute more.

11. THE 3 INGREDIENTS OF PAR.EL.ON. SECURITY
•Two Factor Authentication Based on strong
passwords and OTPTokens
• FullTransparency : Open Source , Public User Profiles ,
PublicVotes, Independent BallotsVerification ( Helios-Voting
inspired digitally signed receipt )
•Open Mirroring: Remote Duplication & Auto Recovery,
Data Consistency assured throu Multi-Paxos algorithm.

12. USER CERTIFICATION
PROCEDURE
• Certification procedure of the user identity is very strict. It requires a meeting face-to-face
with the Authorized Certification, the verification and digital photo recording of his paper
documents, including his photo taken from the identity document to use as the only user
profile photo, the signing by the user of documents authorizing the public display of his
picture, his name and his social security number (NIN) for crowd auditing and verification.
• Delivery by hand of the OTPToken by the Authorized Certifier and registration of the
token on the Parelon Certification Server. A password of 32 characters generated by the
server ( which should be changed at the first login ) must be also given by hand in a closed
envelope to the user by the certifier.
• A double log of all user profile informations is mandatory: they are recorded both on the
Certification Server Online, and on a personal paper register.
• Each authorized certifier must sign a document which legally commits itself not to certify
false identity and to follow the strict certification procedures. If a certifier registers a fake
user and he is discovered, the system provides for the immediate re-certification (by
another authorized certifier) of all users that have been certified by him.

13. MECHANISMS AIMEDTO REDUCETHE
DICTATORSHIP OFTHE ACTIVERTS
(hyperactive extroverts or astroturfers)
•Each unelected user has the right to to raise only one question per week
•Each unelected user is entitled to create only one proposal per week for each question
•Each unelected user has the right to suggest only one amendment for each proposal every
week (an amendment is a set of one or more changes to the proposed draft)
•The maximum number of issues that can be in each stage of the legislative process at the same
time is 14 each week, the other issues must wait in a queue until another slot becomes available
before moving on to the next stage (FIFO QUEUE)
•No delegation options (to avoid vote-buying) and very low quorum (1-20%, based on the
population size and the user base).

14. DETAILS OFTHE
PROPOSAL
(SUMMARY)
•Stages Bar Progress Indicator
•Author Identification With N.I.N.
•Referring Issue Short Summary
•Keywords (push to search similar proposals)
•Current Users Support of this Proposal

15. PROPOSAL DRAFT
(PREVIEW)
•Preview of the current proposal draft
•Option to open a full page view in the
AT4AM editor
•List of linked documents
•Notifications for new or updated
documents

16. SUGGESTED
AMENDMENTS BOX
•Any user can submit a new amendment Amendments
can be supported or opposed (on a 5 levels scale)
•Only the author of the proposal can choose to approve
and implement an amendment.
•Documents linked to an amendment suggestion can be
added and linked to the proposal draft if the author
implements the amendment.
•The author has more chance to see his proposal
approved if he choose to implement the more
supported amendments.
•Amendments are edited in a custom edition of AT4AM,
using Akoma Ntoso format and LegalRuleML

17. COMMISSION
BOX
• Any user can submit a request for aTechnical
Commission
• Number of Requests must reach a quorum to be
approved
• The system invites 12 randomly selected users
from a pool of eligible candidates to join and
form the commission.
• The members are given access to a temporary
discussion area called Commission Discussion
Room. This area is read only for non members of
the commission.

18. STEP 1 :
COMMISSION
CONVOCATION
• Each proposal requires the author to specify
the skills required to evaluate it.
• Users can request additional or different skills,
and the system will select the 4 most
requested skills.
• Every user with the needed academic skills can
register to be a candidate member for the
commissions. The requisites are certified
university degree and academic titles that
qualify him as an expert in the field specified
by the proposal keywords.

19. STEP 2:
WAITING FOR
QUORUM
• After a user has submitted his request for the
convocation of aTechnical Commission and
proposed additional skills and competences, he
must wait until the total number of user
requests reach a quorum (1-20%, based on the
population size and the user base).
• For the Budget Commission and the Legal
Commission this procedure is not necessary;
those are mandatory and automatically
convocated after theTechnical Commission
stage.

20. STEP 3:
WAITING FOR
MEMBERS
• The total number of members seats for each commission is 12.
The 12 seats are partitioned into 3 or 4 groups of the different
skills requested for evaluate the proposal, sized in proportion to
the requests made by the users.
• Candidates are invited via email, and have the option to accept
or decline the invitation to be part of the Committee
• If an invited candidate declines or does not respond within a
time limit to the email, the system automatically extracts at
random another candidate from the pool of remaining experts
registered in the system.
• The email calls stop being sent when you reach the full number
of 12 Commissioners

21. STEP 4:
PROPOSAL UNDER EXAMINATION
• Commissioners are given access to a temporary area called “Commission Discussion Room”, an
area reserved to them and their proposals for the draft text of the technical report, but visible
(read-only) from all the other users.
• In this area the committee members can write a report using the same tools used by citizens for
the draft proposals.Various versions and drafts of theTechnical Report can be proposed and
amended. All amendments are subject to the same selection by number of supporters used for the
law proposals, but those are also subject to an additional explicit vote each time the author of the
proposal decide to implement one of them. Only the amendments approved by the majority by
voting on each amendment are integrated in the draft text.
• Members have also the right to propose an alternative report draft if they think that none of the
current drafts can be correct via amendments but a completely rewrite is needed.As in the case of
the competing law proposals, only one version of the technical report will be approved at the end,
using the Schulze preferential voting method.
• While the draft and the amendments are discussed by the committee members, users can follow
their work in a transparent and read-only manner.
• The committee has a maximum time limit of selectable duration (ranging from one week to 6
months). If the committee fails to reach a majority consensus on the text of a report, the
committee is dissolved and it is convened another composed by different members.

22. STEP 4:
THE COMMISSION
DISCUSSION ROOM
• They can also consult the curricula of the members
of the commission, and eventually making a
“rejection request” if they think that the academic
titles reported in the curricula are false or forged.
• Contested members have 7 days to upload the
documents that confirms their titles.
• If the documents are not uploaded or are
insufficient, they are automatically removed from
the commission and from the candidates pool.

23. STEP 5:
THE COMMISSION
TECHNICAL REPORT IS READY
• Once approved by the technical committee published the technical report is permanently attached to the proposal
draft, all users can read it and evaluate it. The Commission can also optionally propose some amendments to the
proposal draft, and those will be automatically implemented if the report is approved by the users at the voting
stage (STEP 6).
• Along with the report the commission must vote for a verdict with two possible outcomes: FAVORABLE or
UNFAVORABLE. If the verdict is unfavorable the users can still vote to approve the proposal draft, but the vote
must be approved with a qualified majority (2/3 of voters).
• The report must not be only an evaluation of the technical feasibility of the proposal, but in a dedicated section
must enumerate, in a clear and understandable way, all the positive and negative effects that the adoption of the
proposal would have on the citizens, so that their vote will be an INFORMED CONSENT.
• The text of the report can be read online or downloaded in open formats (ODF) or printable formats (PDF).All
reports are persistently stored on the server and they can be searched at any time by anyone, even non users. If
there are any amendments to the text proposed by the committee, anybody can view them too in the editor
AT4AM .
• If the final report is approved by the vote of the Committee members, then the users are asked to vote to
approve the report and any amendments made to the text by the committee. If approved, the proposal of the
citizens is updated with the new text. If the report is rejected with a qualified majority (2/3 of voters), a new
committee is automatically convocated, and the process repeats until a report is approved.

24. AT4AM INTEGRATION AND UI REDESIGN
www.at4am.org
AT4AM - European Parliament Amendment Open SourceTool

25. AT4AM "LIGHT" FORTOUCH DEVICES

26. TWO COLUMNS AMENDMENTVIEW

27. COLUMNS /TABLE CELLS SELECTION
The choices NEW or DELETE are followed by a choice between 4 options:
Right Column, Left Column, Row Above, Row Below.

28. Page
Left
Margin
Page
Right
Margin
Right NeckLeft Neck
Selected Article
ToolboxLeft Edge
SelectionToolbox
Components
•Left Edge : Position mark
•Necks :Visual Connectors (size
constant)
•Selection Box : SelectedText or
Paragraph
•Toolbox : Multilevel Menu

29. Page
Left
Margin
Page
Right
Margin
Left Edge Toolbox
Right Neck
Selected Article
Left Neck
Browser
Window
Page
Left
Margin
Page
Right
Margin
Toolbox
Right NeckLeft Neck
Selected Article
Left Edge
Browser
Window
TheToolbox is anchored
to the selection
in the document page
HowTheToolbox Works

30. Default Position
Page
Left
Margin
Page
Right
Margin
Right NeckLeft Neck
Selected Article
ToolboxLeft Edge
End of Page Position
Page
Left
Margin
Page
Right
Margin
Left Neck Right Neck
Selected Article
Toolbox
Left Edge
HowTheToolbox Works

31. Selection of Paragraphs with the SecondTouch
Default Position
Page
Left
Margin
Page
Right
Margin
Right NeckLeft Neck
Selected
Paragraph
ToolboxLeft Edge
End of Page Position
Page
Left
Margin
Page
Right
Margin
Left Neck Right Neck
Selected
Paragraph
Toolbox
Left Edge

32. http://lime.cirsfid.unibo.it/
INITIAL DRAFTING OFTHE
BILLS
•The user can import the text of the proposals from
existing documents, but we strongly encourage the
creation of the first draft directly in Akoma Ntoso
format with the online editor
•We are collaborating with University of Bologna (Prof.
Monica Palmirani and Prof. FabioVitali ) to integrate the
LIME Editor in PARELON
•We are working to develop a customized regional and
national set of legal rules and constraints to help the user
drafting a well formed legislative document using the
LegalRuleML standard
•We are developing a new user interface for both LIME
and AT4AM that will allow the user with no knowledge
of law or of XML to understand and use all of the legally
binding elements of the Akoma Ntoso

33. END
Slides created by Emanuele Sabetta
emanuele.sabetta@gmail.com
http://www.parelon.lazio.it/