Let the party begin,
Skimming through it I think you should look into empowerthyself.com and their attempts to “gamify” protest about 10-15 years ago, when gamification was the current fad in tech circles.
In short though it failed because by motivating people to do (a limited selection of top-down approved) tasks through a scoring system, all it did was promote people trying to game the system to get a high score rather than do any meaningful work. It ends up with people doing bare-minimum technically-good things for selfish reasons. The entire project becomes poisoned because no one is actually in it to do good things, just to profit from it. Assuming the ends will justify the means badly underestimates the ability of people to exploit a competitive situation.
Additionally, unless I skimmed over it, one of the technical details missing is how someone would be rewarded anyway. It sounds like you’re edging toward community voting on when someone would receive their token for a set bit of work. So if someone does good work but is socially unpopular it’s likely they’d be vulnerable to loosing their reward. Likewise by limiting the number that can be awarded in one week it promotes people being economical with their efforts; doing no more than provides them with direct benefit. The paper mentions straying from an GDP-focussed economy, but by turning good actions into a artificially limited resource it’d seem to be encouraging the capitalist attitude it’s trying to get away from.
Thanks Pete. I think this is different from the gamification because it’s an evolving decentralised governance system, so it can adapt to people trying to game the system. In fact in effort to game the system the have to put work in which will benefit us.
Also we have an active community already doing this without reward, so some people may do the minimum to receive the maximum weekly rewards, but others will do more because they enjoy it and believe in the mission.
A bot scours our approved social media networks for hashtags as proof of work, pulling them into a list that can be checked by our systems bounty hunters, looking for someone trying to cheat the system.
In regards to changing the world’s economy. I believe cryptocurrency will gradually do that anyway, probably hand in hand with UBI.
This is more like an intermediary which allows people to focus on improving issues to well-being in their local community. Something which is increasingly been lost due to pressure from today’s economic system. It’s like a fun pressure valve, and a midway step before the world begins to shift.
Decentralised gets thrown around a lot these days. The cryptocurrency system being used for it may be, but your proof of work system authorising the token payments sounds like it is more centralised. If, the intent is to turn this rewards scheme into a system of governance? I think a sociologist needs to step into this discussion about now.
Yes, it is to create a decentralised system if governance, focused by a set of core values. I’m hoping sociologists, etc, join in discussing how to best shape it.
Anyone in the community can be a bounty hunter, just head to the bounty hunting thread and check proof of work collected by the bot to see if there’s any issues there. This is work that’s essential to a healthy community and incentivised. They could have their friends approve it, but its still there in the list for others to check again. It just takes one person to spot something fishy and raise a flag… all the evidence is available on social media, it’d get caught soon enough if someone is trying to scam the system.
All the proof of work will be gathered into an easily browsable list and is automatically approved after 1 week unless someone flags up an issue.
Thank you for those replies.
Thank you for checking the project over, your voice is a welcome contribution