“The revolution doesn’t happen when society adopts new tools. It happens when society adopts new behaviours.” – Clay Shirky
This has become Lynne Featherstone’s quote du jour since she took on the role of Chair of the party’s new technology board a few weeks ago. I’m really pleased with this as a guiding principle, because I think it will enable the board to keep the right balance between the medium and the message.
And that’s just my opinion – judging from the messages Facebook groups and discussion boards and the emails to Lynne, a huge number of people, both medium-specialists and message-specialists, are eager to make a contribution.
So to get a handle on our resources, Lynne has created a Liberty Research survey to gauge the abilities and volunteering capacity of the party’s techie contingent. Yes, all of you. Off you go and take it, code monkeys, flash fans, graphics geeks, open saucies and Twitterati, and read Lynne’s post as well.
I note that, as with leafleting, it’s not necessary to actually be a party member, you just have to be willing to volunteer your skills.
* Well, no, I suppose it doesn’t have to be orderly. Or a queue. Any sort of 3D pattern based on any sort of organising principle, basically. Or chaos theory if you like.
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Nine in ten paying more than necessary in Vehicle Excise Duty
A radical agenda but can Burnham deliver?
Reg Calvert and his boarding school of rock
A shocking abuse of the legal system where the rich try to bully the weak and poor into submission
Alex Macfie
Ruth Bright
Slamdac
9 Comments
Is a stack more efficient than a queue? Should we use a linked-list instead?
Is an array faster, or perhaps an array of pointers?
I don’t think a stack would be appropriate due to the LIFO principle.
As for an array, given that you would be constantly having to re-dimension it that is likely to be inefficient.
I like your linked list idea but I personally would go for a Binary Search Tree which would allow the applications to be sorted in a fairly efficient way in terms of skills and abilities. Of course that may need to be rebalanced when…
I’ll stop now before Alix kills me.
Personally I’ve always been a fan of the DEQ as it lets you burn the candle at both ends!
(DEQ = Double-Ended Queue. For those of us who designed databases in the good old days)
How about taking a number? Then whilst we’re waiting for it to be called, we can wonder around a bit, looking at various aspects of social media in the mean time.
I’m sure a bunch of web geeks can spontaneously organise themselves. 😉
Mmmm. I’d like to know a lot more about this body first, Alix. Who appointed it? Who is it accountable to? What’s its remit?
The LD’s are highly critical of Quango’s while constantly inventing ‘QuaLDo’s’.
Martin: the body’s been set-up following the Bones Review. Things have moved on a little since that review, e.g. the board is now the “Technology Advisory Board”. Lynne’s role as chair was a nomination from Nick which the Federal Executive (FE) then agreed to.
Continuing the thread about queues, have people seen what happened when Barack Obama was asked a related technical question when visiting Google….
I suspect he may have got some advance notice, but I think he pitched the response perfectly…
ooh ooh ah aahr. Me code monkey. Dig my shlib (shared library that is)