(quoted from discussion with HansWobbe on LionKimbro personal page).
MicroTasks are …
MicroTasks have several underlying assumptions …
Hope you don’t mind, HansWobbe, I took the liberty of parking your quote on this page, with intentions of hopefully growing it. This is your idea and your call of course, but I like the idea so much that I really wanted to see it grow.
I also wrote about it and attributed it to you at OBM:RevenueSharingModel (and included a reference to LionKimbro’s ideas for LocalNames, too).
This is a really neat subject; I’d tie it with CyberneticEconomy, and would even list it as a point in the CyberneticEconomy page.
Some interesting possible seed questions:
I had forgotten about the CyberneticEconomy page. That is actually related to the goals for version 2.0 of the XTIN:ProjectPointSystem.
in version 1.0, the tracking and distribution of money is done (mostly) manually, with some assistance from WikiCalc for transparent reporting, and calculation. In version 2.0, we hope to automate some of the functions of tracking and distribution. Particularly the distribution, so that when money comes into the system, it is instantly distributed as fast as possible.
Re: Questions; I hope that HansWobbe will have some time to expand on what he originally wrote. It really resonated with my thinking in this area, although we may have slightly different applications in mind.
I’ll take a crack at a couple of the questions right now:
There seems to be a concept/idea that is growing out of our conversation about this. I imagined SocialSynergy:OpenValueNetworks, and RevenueSharingModel. And, I recall you discussing PayExpected.
Also, a related conversation about YochaiBenkler’s book “The Wealth Of Networks”, on CollectiveProblemSolving wiki, where I think that we are figuring out that this is actually a whole new economy within a larger mass economy.
Because it is a new economy, it requires people to adopt new/different assumptions about value, trust, production, distribution, etc. Not totally radically new/different, but new and different all the same.
I think what it would take to get conventionally paid MicroTasks fulfilled within the OpenSource development world is a group of people who create and sustain relationships around the development of OpenSource software, along with a committment to track and share revenue. I think that these relationships can also be reinforced by tracking and reciprocating/rewarding other shared value beyond just money. Examples include exchanges of knowledge, support, feedback, web/voice/video discussions, exchanges of data, resources, contributions of ideas/concepts, perhaps all combined with Time Budget measurement (somewhere in CommunityWiki, I recall seeing a comment from LionKimbro about an idea that he had for a “time budget” system, but now searching through CW I cannot find it).
There becomes a reciprocal and value-increasing relationship between all of the parties involved in the new economy. A sharing of tangible and intangible value between all parties, including the people formerly known as the "audience" or "end user", or "customer". A commons is created around this value sharing, and rewards are given for engagement with the network of people involved. CyberneticEconomy, HiveAllocation, [http://socialsynergyweb.net/cgi-bin/wiki/RevenueSharingModel RevenueSharingModel(s)], AboutLogistics, etc are ways to think about technically facilitating these networks of relationships.
* If I write articles on Community, because people like the sort of content, and I’m rewarded in positive reputation (see: ReputationCurrencies,) am I fulfilling a MicroTask??
I think it’s possible, if the desired exchange between the two parties is ReputationCurrency?. I think that for each project, and each participant, that the types of value exchanges sought should be made explicit. It would be cool if this could actually eventually be part of some type of MicroFormat. So, if you could say that you are looking for feedback on exchanges, just as people who transact on ebay or amazon are looking for these types of value exchanges. Only, there could be more sub-categories for reputation ratings, depending on the interaction and exchanges you had with a particular community or group of people. And, it should be reciprocal/Two-way, so that people cannot be destroyed in reputation unfairly.
(I updated http://socialsynergyweb.net/cgi-bin/wiki/RevenueSharingModel to include concepts discussed here, and links to several CW and other pages)
Earlier on this page, Sam poses the question …
Having mulled this over a bit, I think that a fundamental requirement is what Bankers refer to as a reliable “Payment system”. Obviously this statement inevitably begs the question “What is a payment system?” Since I continue to be time constrained (likely for the balance of 2007-02), I need to limit my work on this to saying that I am forming the opinion that recent efforts in the areas of AlternativeCurrencies and related topics, suggest to me that a ForeignExchange? module that can be used to convert between the many existing and proposed Currencies is a prerequisite.
I’m not sure that this will ‘resonate’ with Sam’s thinking. If it doesn’t then I would prefer to refocus what I can do, so that I can contribute to the interests of others, rather than merely pursuing my own.
Hans, actually, it does resonate with my thinking and direction.
Let me tell you that right now I have working PaymentSystem?, that can account for ForeignExchange? or currency exchange.
However, the payment system is manual.
What I am doing is plugging a person, and a “value” for their “work” (in this case for a “MicroTask?”) into an openSource server-based spread sheet program called WikiCalc. This program can do all of the calculations, which would be configured pretty much just like a regular spreadsheet (which means this could also be done on your desktop in a regular spread sheet, but WikiCalc lets you keep it transparent, and lets you give as many people access to it as you’d like).
Then, I can export from this to PayPal via it’s “mass pay” function. This is version 1.0 of a “PaymentSystem?”, that is based on “points”.
In version 2.0, I hope to create a way to:
Now, of course, conversion of some AlternativeCurrency (like video game world currencies) to actual hard currency, usually depends upon the currency exchanges of the video game world in question.
But, the calculation of up to the minute exchange rates by importing data from different sources is possible.
If I keep pursuing this with WikiCalc, I would have to figure out a way to import and export this data to and from WikiCalc. The pros for doing this are the potential for transcluding WikiCalc data into other pages online, and for allowing multiple people to edit the data. The cons are that there is probably an easier way to do it
.
One thing is clear to me now, though. It is plausible to create revenue sharing models that work with CyberneticEconomy systems, using OpenSource software and OpenStandards?.
I certainly agree it is possible to create more revenue sharing models than those that already exist since I’ve been introduced to a great number of variations on this theme (usually refered to as Shareholder Agreements in mainstream western business contexts). In my experience, I find a need to have slightly different appoaches for each of the enterprises I engage in. While this is tedious and may generate a lot of work for lawyers, it seems to be necessary to document the stated needs of each of the participants and their agreement.
How do you suggest I learn a bit more about your WikiCalc?
Hans, shareholder agreements are one of the big “great divide” areas that I need to address with OpenBusinessModel Revenue Sharing agreements (shareholder agreements). At least in some cases. Especially those projects that involve production of a product intended to be sold, and revenue split.
The idea that I have is (putting this into a sort of DocumentMode for possible re-use later here and elsewhere):
Once an organization or group decides to come to an agreement, that group can co-author a draft of their agreement transparently in Wiki, online, if they are developing an OpenBusinessModel (or in a private password protected wiki if necassary).
ConversationProcess applies to drafting a WikiAgreement?. The process of transferring theories (TheoryBuilding) into DocumentMode “clear thesis” pages, and summarizing conversations into easy to read documents.
Voting can also be part of the ConversationProcess in WikiAgreement?. A process such as TedErnst’s and BrandonCsSander?’s BeyondYes gives a groundwork for merging ConversationProcess with WikiAgreement?.
One of the possibilities among some communities, and networks of communities is a remixing of the traditional “phases” of development of ideas.
For instance, a traditional set of phases for creating an agreement might have been something like:
| Brainstorming/Idea/Theory Phase: many different ideas discussed,perhaps even in many different spaces and places online and off. People may also sign NDA’s in non- OpenBusinessModelarrangements? |
| Formalization Phase: Usually, one person takes the responsibility to formalize a summary of an agreement structure, and the group formalizes the agreement with a lawyer. Or, they follow a formal bylaw creation process if they incorporate. |
| HypothesisTesting?, PilotProject?, Prototyping phase: In traditional business, it is often after all of this that people start putting resources into “testing the waters”, or into creating small scale working models of their larger project. |
In WikiAgreementProcess?(es), and OpenBusinessModel applications, you can often throw out the NDA. And, you can merge processes and phases. For instance, all three “traditional” phases above can possibly be merged, and hypothesis testing can be an ongoing sub-process. So can feedback, and TheoryBuilding, and creation of KnowledgeCommons?, in OpenBusiness applications.
WikiAgreementProcess? rolls together many different potential processes, and traditional phases of organizational/business development. There is no one universal recipe, but rather a sort of “toolkit” of many potentially useful “sub”-processes.
Also, Hans, perhaps you can talk more about why you are interested in ForeignExchange? systems in relation to RevenueSharingModel? applications. I was thinking more about this the other day, and I started to think about not-so-apparent possibilities with AlternativeCurrency. Especially in the realm of partneship between many different groups. A lot of people are skeptical about AlternativeCurrency. But, I think that slepticism mostly comes from not seeing many examples of successful use of AlternativeCurrency, or always thinking about it’s direct 1:1 relationship with traditional “hard” currency. AlternativeCurrency may also be exchanged for other “value”, like time, or even resources, among networks of people.
For instance, you could set up a PredictionMarket, and use the an AlternativeCurrency in the PredictionMarket, but people could take that currency and use it with other businesses and groups who benefit from the PredictionMarket.
WikiCalc: I took the password protection off of the “sample” WikiCalc 0.97 instance that I have set up. So, feel free to play around with it here:
http://s4560.gridserver.com/cgi-bin/wikicalc/wikicalccgi.pl
You can also see the ProjectPoint? system example there, under “test1”.
DanBricklin? just released WikiCalc 1.0. So, I plan on installing this new version for production use on the socialsynergyweb.net server, it fixes a few bugs (although I have not yet run into them myself).
(copied this to blog on {http://socialsynergyweb.net/cgi-bin/wiki/BlogPages OBM]).