[p2p-research] (almost) Gone to Croatan

Wed Sep 24 07:43:49 CEST 2008

Yes, I like revolving loans funds too, they make sense. :)

You'll see such a fund included in this crazy (badly designed) diagram I did
in Jan 05:
http://open.coop/tiki-download_wiki_attachment.php?attId=38 (.pdf)

I'm going to try and write up more of what about my envisioned system and
hopefully get some feedback on it :)

Josef.

2008/9/24 Michel Bauwens <michelsub2004 at gmail.com>

> I'm certainly open to other alternative schemes ... my own is indeed just
> one of the possibilities, which however uniquely combined the revolving fund
> within it .. (this is a proven scheme that works well all over the world)
>
> perhaps we can simply offer a double option, an automatic option, which
> follows my previous proposal, and a individualized option, so that you can
> allocate as you wish ... Those who do not wish the extra choice would follow
> the collective process as a default.
>
> Michel
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 11:52 AM, Josef Davies-Coates <
> josef at uniteddiversity.com> wrote:
>
>> I completely agree, but can't members agree on some broad commons
>> objectives first (e.g. only projects that members agree help to create
>> viable p2p infrastructures) but then freely choose how to allocate their
>> funds within that?
>>
>> Of my 1%+ of income I contribute all of it goes on projects that have been
>> highly rated and agreed by members via an agreed process, but I'd like to be
>> able to choose to invest 40% in Open Source Ecology, 40% in the Ecological
>> Land Co-op, 10% to WorldFilmCollective and 10% to wiki and blog maintainers.
>>
>> You might choose the same projects (or not) but with a different mix of
>> percentages.
>>
>> Saying that, I'd be well up for insisting that a certain large percentage
>> can only be spend on land, but that might just be me :)
>>
>> What do others think? Does what I outline above make sense? It is too
>> complicated?
>>
>> Josef.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 2008/9/24 Michel Bauwens <michelsub2004 at gmail.com>
>>
>>> I think it what is required is a balance between individual and
>>> collective, otherwise it is  just one more market ...
>>>
>>> In the system I imagine, people who are not part of the collective can
>>> still donate freely to individual projects ..., but the people in the
>>> community accept some constraints because of the common objective of
>>> creating viable p2p infrastructures ...
>>>
>>> Michel
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 10:57 AM, Josef Davies-Coates <
>>> josef at uniteddiversity.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> In my "dream" system individuals members decide for themselves where
>>>> their money goes, including what percentage of what they put in the pot goes
>>>> where.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 2008/9/24 Michel Bauwens <michelsub2004 at gmail.com>
>>>>
>>>> Sam,
>>>>>
>>>>> if you recall, my proposal was roughly:
>>>>>
>>>>> - 40% in the revolving pool
>>>>>
>>>>> - 40% to the most voted upon proposals
>>>>>
>>>>> - 15% long term investment
>>>>>
>>>>> - 5% for the people working on the software and management of the pool
>>>>> itself
>>>>>
>>>>> Michel
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 8:48 PM, Samuel Rose <samuel.rose at gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> So far, for decision making, I have employed Advanced Polling module,
>>>>>> with the http://www.p2pfoundation.net/Consensus_Polling method. It
>>>>>> works well, for sure. Consensus Polling is flexible enough to work in many
>>>>>> different collective decision making scenarios.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I will set up a new version of this, which also had e-commerce tools
>>>>>> working for the money pooling aspect (I will probably hold off on re-setting
>>>>>> up money collection just yet, as so much has changed about Drupal's
>>>>>> ecommerce tools that I'll need to make some changes before redeploying that)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But, we could experiment for a week or two with fake currency, because
>>>>>> the important part is the decision making process, and getting that right as
>>>>>> Joseph mentioned
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The resource pool that I was setting up, per Michel's idea, was to
>>>>>> have a decision making space for collectively donating a percentage of the
>>>>>> money collected, and a decision making space for collectively *investing*
>>>>>> towards a for-profit return (investing club) part of it. Michel also wanted
>>>>>> to give part of it to each member in turn on a rotating basis. I can't
>>>>>> recall the percentages he came up with. What do you think about that idea?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Or, we could just go with the first 2 (donate and invest). How can
>>>>>> this work with consensus pooling? A proposal is posted that is also a
>>>>>> consensus poll. The poll is timed, and the person who starts the poll is
>>>>>> tasked with helping to work the "not yet" votes into the dynamic plan. Once
>>>>>> enough votes are switched to "yes" (maybe 80%) it becomes a "static
>>>>>> contract", and the proposal is funded (whether as donation or investment).
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 9:36 AM, Josef Davies-Coates <
>>>>>> josef at uniteddiversity.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Very quick response:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks for positive responses :-D
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yes, I think the main thing will a decision making platform of sorts
>>>>>>> so that people can nicely decide (together, but with their own personal
>>>>>>> preferences) when money should go.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Is there somewhere I can have a play with the drupal stuff you've got
>>>>>>> already?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Josef.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 2008/9/23 Samuel Rose <samuel.rose at gmail.com>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> A quick reply to one part:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Joseph, I will follow your lead, too. Maybe you can talk about
>>>>>>>> details, as I have fallen behind on keeping track of your progress. Do you
>>>>>>>> need software, help, what do you need to get collaboration around resource
>>>>>>>> pooling going online? I have some workable code done in Drupal that could be
>>>>>>>> used if needed...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 7:16 AM, Michel Bauwens <
>>>>>>>> michelsub2004 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hi Sam, Paul, Josef,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> thanks for  thinking this through and for your proposals ...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 1) I'm definitely interested in money/resource pooling, but would
>>>>>>>>> rather follow a lead in this. If Josef takes the lead, we can support him in
>>>>>>>>> the ways he requires ...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 2) merging of movements ... Again, I'm interested and have put
>>>>>>>>> forward some proposals in that sense. But you have to take into account both
>>>>>>>>> ego and branding, and 'visions'. Ego: people are invested in their projects;
>>>>>>>>> Brand: online brands, even if they at presently fail to generate much
>>>>>>>>> return, have value as well. What I'm saying is that I would be really
>>>>>>>>> reluctant to give up the 'brand' of p2p foundation. Visions: p2pfoundation
>>>>>>>>> and cooperation commons are related, but also different, their purpose is
>>>>>>>>> not the same.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So, how would you create a higher entity, especially if you do not
>>>>>>>>> have any financial means to begin with. What would the purpose be of such a
>>>>>>>>> higher entity. Research (coop comm), political change (p2p found) ?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I'm interested in creating a explicitely political movement,
>>>>>>>>> dedicated to bringing about a p2p society. Such an entity could then have a
>>>>>>>>> research wing (coop comm and p2p found wiki), a political wing, a funding
>>>>>>>>> entity, etc...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> If you simply want to intermesh research, I think the solution is
>>>>>>>>> technical, i.e. the ability to easily cross-reference ...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> One more thing, as an individual, I'm most interested in continuing
>>>>>>>>> to act as a librarian, and as a political theorist; any proposal which
>>>>>>>>> allows me to do this in a broader entity, with more means, I'm game.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Josef: do you remember our prior discussion about merging UD and
>>>>>>>>> p2p ... what about it?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Michel
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Josef Davies-Coates
>>>>>>> 07974 88 88 95
>>>>>>> http://uniteddiversity.com
>>>>>>> Together We Have Everything
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Sam Rose
>>>>>> Social Synergy
>>>>>> Tel:+1(517) 639-1552
>>>>>> Cel: +1-(517)-974-6451
>>>>>> AIM: Str9960
>>>>>> Linkedin Profile: https://www.linkedin.com/in/samrose
>>>>>> skype: samuelrose
>>>>>> email: samuel.rose at gmail.com
>>>>>> http://socialsynergyweb.com/services
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Related Sites/Blogs/Projects:
>>>>>> OpenBusinessModels:
>>>>>> http://socialsynergyweb.net/cgi-bin/wiki/FrontPage
>>>>>> http://p2pfoundation.net
>>>>>> http://blog.p2pfoundation.net
>>>>>> http://www.cooperationcommons.com
>>>>>> http://barcampbank.org
>>>>>> http://communitywiki.org
>>>>>> http://openfarmtech.org
>>>>>> Information Filtering:
>>>>>> http://ma.gnolia.com/people/srose/bookmarks
>>>>>> http://del.icio.us/srose
>>>>>> http://twitter.com/SamRose
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> The P2P Foundation researches, documents and promotes peer to peer
>>>>> alternatives.
>>>>>
>>>>> Wiki and Encyclopedia, at http://p2pfoundation.net; Blog, at
>>>>> http://blog.p2pfoundation.net; Newsletter, at
>>>>> http://integralvisioning.org/index.php?topic=p2p
>>>>>
>>>>> Basic essay at http://www.ctheory.net/articles.aspx?id=499; interview
>>>>> at
>>>>> http://poynder.blogspot.com/2006/09/p2p-very-core-of-world-to-come.html
>>>>> BEST VIDEO ON P2P:
>>>>> http://video.google.com.au/videoplay?docid=4549818267592301968&hl=en-AU
>>>>>
>>>>> KEEP UP TO DATE through our Delicious tags at
>>>>> http://del.icio.us/mbauwens
>>>>>
>>>>> The work of the P2P Foundation is supported by SHIFTN,
>>>>> http://www.shiftn.com/
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Josef Davies-Coates
>>>> 07974 88 88 95
>>>> http://uniteddiversity.com
>>>> Together We Have Everything
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> The P2P Foundation researches, documents and promotes peer to peer
>>> alternatives.
>>>
>>> Wiki and Encyclopedia, at http://p2pfoundation.net; Blog, at
>>> http://blog.p2pfoundation.net; Newsletter, at
>>> http://integralvisioning.org/index.php?topic=p2p
>>>
>>> Basic essay at http://www.ctheory.net/articles.aspx?id=499; interview at
>>> http://poynder.blogspot.com/2006/09/p2p-very-core-of-world-to-come.html
>>> BEST VIDEO ON P2P:
>>> http://video.google.com.au/videoplay?docid=4549818267592301968&hl=en-AU
>>>
>>> KEEP UP TO DATE through our Delicious tags at
>>> http://del.icio.us/mbauwens
>>>
>>> The work of the P2P Foundation is supported by SHIFTN,
>>> http://www.shiftn.com/
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Josef Davies-Coates
>> 07974 88 88 95
>> http://uniteddiversity.com
>> Together We Have Everything
>>
>
>
>
> --
> The P2P Foundation researches, documents and promotes peer to peer
> alternatives.
>
> Wiki and Encyclopedia, at http://p2pfoundation.net; Blog, at
> http://blog.p2pfoundation.net; Newsletter, at
> http://integralvisioning.org/index.php?topic=p2p
>
> Basic essay at http://www.ctheory.net/articles.aspx?id=499; interview at
> http://poynder.blogspot.com/2006/09/p2p-very-core-of-world-to-come.html
> BEST VIDEO ON P2P:
> http://video.google.com.au/videoplay?docid=4549818267592301968&hl=en-AU
>
> KEEP UP TO DATE through our Delicious tags at http://del.icio.us/mbauwens
>
> The work of the P2P Foundation is supported by SHIFTN,
> http://www.shiftn.com/
>

-- 
Josef Davies-Coates
07974 88 88 95
http://uniteddiversity.com
Together We Have Everything
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://listcultures.org/pipermail/p2presearch_listcultures.org/attachments/20080924/5ba26b0c/attachment-0001.html 