雨蒼(Billy)：
系統由「提案方」（例如金管會提出群眾募資案、經濟部提出閉鎖型公司案、財政部提出網路交易課稅案）、「編輯群」（資策會科技法律研究所）、「板主群」（vTaiwan.tw 專案社群貢獻者）共同維護。
各提案開放網路討論後，再由積極參與討論者組成「工作組」，進行實體、線上聚會。
每項提案會經過下列流程，每階段為時約一個月，但第二階段長度可視需求彈性調整。
ref:
以上是針對已有具體方向的提案，若是無具體方向，則可能採用Pol.is的方式，詢問大眾意見，進而在邀集專家學者與網友的聚會上聚焦問題。ex：網路賣酒、Uber。
The system (vTaiwan?) consists of the "proposer group" (for example, the FSC (Avoiding abbreviation) proposes equity-based crowdfunding, the Ministry of Economic Affairs proposes the closed-held company case, and the Ministry of Finance proposes taxation for online transactions), the "editorial group" (supported by III’s (Institute for Information Industry) Science & Tech Law Institute), the "moderator group" (vTaiwan.tw project community contributors) — they jointly collaborate on the vTaiwan system.
After the proposals are open to discussion on the Internet, active contributors would form "working groups" to conduct physical and online gatherings.
Each proposal goes through the following processes, each of which takes about a month, but the length of the second phase can be adjusted as needed.
Stage 0: Preparation
- A proposer (is it a group or an individual as previously it is said the "proposer group") submitted the case for discussion
- An editorial group make adjustments and format conversion for better understanding
- The proposer confirmed that the reconfigured content is correct
- A moderator group posts the content and supporting materials online
Stage 1: Discussion
- Officially started the first phase of the online discussion
- All inquiries will receive a procedural reply from moderators within 24hr
- Substantial questions in the editorial field of expertise will receive replies from editors (within seven days)
- Substantial questions in the proposer’s field of expertise will receive replies from the proposer (within seven days)
Stage 2: Drafting
- Moderators send out working group (there are two seemly subjects in this sentence, bit confusing) invitations to stakeholders and contributors discovered in the previous stage; the working group agrees on meeting times
- The working group iterates on recommendations, which are posted online as discussion topics
- Working group meetings are conducted in a face-to-face format and with live captioning and video broadcast, so anyone can join through online messaging (leaving their opinions online?)
- Seven days after each recommendation is made, the proposer formulates a concrete response to the recommendations
- When the proposer comes up with a working draft, the working group meet again to bring together the responses to the preliminary draft and amendments
Stage 3: Decision
- The proposer may decide whether to continue drafting, taking into account amendments, or move to the stage/phase of finalization
- At the time of finalization, the sponsor (proposer? or the proposer group) shall respond in writing to the specific proposals received in all preceding phases
- The finalized text is published by the editorial group as the third phase of the content
- The working group’s discussion forums remain in place to keep track of the status of the implementation of the peacekeeping operation
ref: [vTaiwan FAQ](https://g0v.hackpad.tw/ep/pad/static/bNNRo8iHKVf)
The above procedure is used, generally, when the issue has well-defined facets (boundaries?). If there is no specific facets, Pol.is may be used during Stage 0, to consolidate opinions from the general public and then run a live-streamed meeting with the gathering of experts, scholars and netizens. ex: Internet sale of liquor; Uber.
雨蒼(Billy)：
曾協助完善一些技術，協助管理版面，擔任實體會議直播時的網路彙傳員。
I have helped vTaiwan to refine some of the technologies; such as moderating the forum; and served as a real-time bridge (moderator?) to bring online inputs into the live-streamed conference.
仔魚(Lisa)：
I joined vTaiwan since Oct.2016 as a volunteer contributor, helping Audrey editing legal terms which might be too difficult for the public and shared my point of view as a stakeholder in some cases. (I provide public legal services for startups as my job.)
From Sep.2017 I start running the vTaiwan operating community, provide people clearer access to join the operating of vTaiwan, built a online platform to transparent all the operation process of vTaiwan. (what is that online platform? hackfoldr?)
We have a routine vTaiwan operating meeting on every Wednesday which everyone can join without anybody’s permission with free food, and the minutes of the meeting would be public online immediately. (https://vtw.link/)
雨蒼(Billy)：
以往的狀況下，vTaiwan有唐鳳為首的強大社群協助運作，因此在議題聚焦上較能給予政府單位好的建議，或規劃具體的案件時程。個人不認為現在的vTaiwan運作順暢。
vTaiwan has gathered a powerful community, led by Audrey Tang, that ensured the system’s smooth operation. With that in place, contributors in the community gather high-quality advices to proposers (usually government agencies), and come up with timelines that works with each concrete cases.
仔魚(Lisa)：
I won’t say it work "so well", vTaiwan has its own problems, like every other g0v projects.
From my point of view, I think open, transparency and increasing participation of citizen is what I’m putting my effort in.
雨蒼(Billy)：
目前不清楚。似乎是國發會自行決定。
It’s not explicitly defined; the will of the National Development Council seems to be the primary factor today.
仔魚(Lisa)：
People need to use vTaiwan through the internet, for those potential stakeholders who can’t access to the internet, vTaiwan claims it only focus on policies about digital world.
But you still can see some past cases which is not related to digital world or technology.
雨蒼(Billy)：
科技只是扮演協助訊息流通的技術，只能協助收集意見，以及記錄供大眾查詢，事實上聚焦意見的仍是靠板主與實體會議主持人的能力。
Technology serves as an enabler to facilitate the flow of information. Its primary function is in the collection of views and maintaining records for public inquiries.
To ensure the input is well-focused, we still rely on the skilled moderators and facilitators.
仔魚(Lisa)：
I can list a lot of online tools or platforms we’re using(I believe you already hear the names of these tools from SY Lin or Audrey).
But in my point of view, tools are just tools, none of them is indispensable.
The most important technology we’re using is called "the internet".
雨蒼(Billy)：
一路以來，vTaiwan多數案件參與者都沒有非常多。有些案件較為矚目，但大部分案件討論者並不多。
For each particular case, the working groups involved are actually not that many people. That’s the case ever since vTaiwan started.
It’s true that some cases receive considerable media coverage. However, does not translate directly to the number of contributors.
仔魚(Lisa)：
People involved in vTaiwan in many ways.
Most of people just provided their experiences, ideals and opinions as stakeholders. The communication with Audrey happened online through those online tools or most of cases on vTaiwan, we’ll have more than one offline meetings.
The vTaiwan operating community (including Audrey herself) meet every Wednesday as I mentioned, and we also have a slack group online and https://vtw.link/, for people not familiar with these tools, we made a facebook group recently(https://www.facebook.com/groups/vtaiwan/).
Not all of people involved in the operating community, the communication would be quite simple.
Actually Audrey is very easy to reach for every citizen, you can mail her, leave message on the office website or just simply @ her on Facebook, twitter or PTT (a local online board like Reddit in Taiwan).
雨蒼(Billy)：
有許多法案曾在vTaiwan規劃後通過，包含遠距電傳勞動、閉鎖型公司等，Uber案也促成了多元化計程車方案。可惜的像是網路賣酒案，後來預計送立法院，卻被叫停。
There are many bills passed taking vTaiwan’s recommendations into account, including Tele-working, Closely-held companies, etc. We also contributed to the Uber case that gave rise to the new, diversified taxi program.
Unfortunately, the particulate case of internet sales of liquor was retracted after sending to the legislative.
https://sayit.archive.tw/2015-08-27-uberx-%E8%87%AA%E7%94%A8%E8%BB%8A%E8%BC%89%E5%AE%A2%E6%84%8F%E8%A6%8B%E5%BE%B5%E9%9B%86%E8%AB%AE%E8%A9%A2%E6%9C%83%E8%AD%B0
https://www.bnext.com.tw/article/40741/BN-2016-08-27-201942-44
仔魚(Lisa)：
Some of the public options became part of new laws, but I don’t know if I can tell what’s an achievement and what isn’t, I tend to leave it to the history.
雨蒼(Billy)：
應該先把社群重建起來，要有跟政府方面抗衡的能力。有些該好好談的議題，應該好好談，好好規劃程序、了解議題。
應該要重建工作小組，工作小組要有掌握議題和議題設定的能力，以及逼著部會去面對他們不想面對的利害關係人。
We should again strengthen the community, so it has the ability to negotiate with government agencies.
Some of the newer topics required longer timelines; the time structure planning should be done carefully so we can more deeply understand the issues involved.
The working group structure should be rebuilt, with the aim of capacity-building as to analyze the issues; set relevant agenda; and compel Ministries to engage stakeholders they had been reluctant to engage before.
仔魚(Lisa)：
Expand the scale of participate and the vTaiwan operating community to get enough impact to government (we need more volunteers and digital tools to process opinions from participators and find more stakeholders), more independent and transparent.
vTaiwan has been supported by ministers of Taiwanese government at the first day it born, so our first step was easier than other platform like vTaiwan public servants open their ears and listen to the people and maybe we’re lucky, government may think it’s a good way and willing to do the vTaiwan process(It’s lack of proof to tell which is the reason vTaiwan works now.)
We luckily has minister like Audrey, who keep the value of neutrality to all the cases and willing to be open and transparent, but vTaiwan can’t relied on this forever.
雨蒼(Billy)：
vTaiwan以前的成功，我個人認為來自於一個大政委蔡玉玲，他可以把他想要的案子停下來丟來vTaiwan處理，處理後他也會處理接軌回政府的行政流程，甚至權力行使。但是，提案就多圍繞在當時政委所在乎的案子。
vTaiwan的程序（Process）能發揮作用，是因為政策上有人能夠接軌至體制內的政策（Policy）形成過程。程序和政策互為表裡，如何找到好的議題，轉化至vTaiwan的程序，並形成具體的政策，事實上取決於政務官的一念之間。
如果不看政治，只看技術，當然會對vTaiwan的成果感到驚艷。但事實上，技術在這裡只是扮演輔助的功能，重點仍在於政務官如何信任vTaiwan的社群與機制，在這個過程讓vTaiwan的社群與程序發揮功能，並以權力的方式讓部會願意配合，也願意擔起政治責任，才能將諮詢的結果轉化為具體的法律條文。
當然，唐鳳有唐鳳的價值，以及相應的作法，過往的案子有其時空背景，不能一概而論。但無論如何，科技只是輔助，而政治才是根本的核心。
vTaiwan’s former successes, personally, I think came from the political will from a powerful Minister, Jaclyn Tsai.
Jaclyn’s strategy was to pick the particular bills she wanted to see through in the Administration, and hand them to vTaiwan.
After vTaiwan came up with recommendations, Jaclyn will then make sure they are brought back to administrative processes, and exercise her political power to make sure they get through.
Conversely, the pool of cases were limited around the few cases that she was personally concerned about at that time.
The process of vTaiwan has a role to play, because somebody in the administration can integrated them into the policy formation process within the system. Processes and policies are mutually supportive. How to find good issues, translate them into the vTaiwan community, and formulate specific policies — all these depends, ultimately, on the will of the high-level Political Appointee.
If you do not look at politics, and just looking at technology, of course, you will be amazing about the results of vTaiwan. But in fact, all our technological innovations just play a supporting function here, and the real point is still on how the government officials trust the community and mechanism of vTaiwan.
In the vTaiwan process, the community’s procedural functions and the political power of various agencies must be willing to collaborate. That enables the Political Appointee to take up the political responsibility to translate the results of the consultation into specific legal provisions.
Of course, Audrey still plays a valuable (key?) role in her new position, which necessitates corresponding methodologies.
All vTaiwan cases in the past have their own time and space backgrounds, and they can not be generalized into the future. But in any case, science and technology are only supporting structures, and politics is the fundamental core.
仔魚(Lisa)：
>>Can I also ask for a quote on the problems of vTaiwan
I think vTaiwan relies on the Minister too much.
The problem I concerned very much is that I think the process now really rely on the Minister’s authority.
The vTaiwan project was proposed by the former Minister in g0v’s hackathon, who made a lot of effort on forcing government to cooperate with vTaiwan in the very beginning.
I think the original design was a collaboration of government and the community: the community make sure the platform finds right stakeholders, and collect constructive opinions, in a neutrality role. The Minister make sure that government respond to the demands of the people and transparency .
Although the former director of the vTaiwan community, Audrey became the Minister after the election, I’m afraid that vTaiwan can’t always rely on the attitude of the Minister for transparency in a long-term.
I think it’s time to move to the next stage for vTaiwan, being independent from the Ministers.
The community must get its own impact in the policy-making process.
>>how you are hoping to overcome them?
To expand the community and keep independent from any single person, organization or government.
As a free democratic country, I believe that government will collaborate with people as long as vTaiwan community could prove that there’s REAL needs of people (with a massive amount of opinions), and people would like to provide the solution to problems (good quality of opinions).
So I think we need more people and stakeholders in the community, let more people know about what vTaiwan and what it can do, and translate jargons into a readable text for the public.
On the other hand, to avoid to depend anyone, I still hope vTaiwan community stay as a loose organization, decentralized and flexible open project, people can join in and leave any time like a relay race, so this could be a long-way to go.