Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
Time to rescue Revenue sharing by ThatBritGuy on October 22nd, 2006
The real problem is - is it possible to build a collaborative model that not only relies on collaborative content but also includes some element of collaborative income distribution?

I've been thinking about how this might work for TBB, and it's really not a simple problem. The six options are:

  1. Run it along Kos lines, where the site owner keeps all of the money after expenses.
  2. Run it as a benevolent dictatorship, where the site owner keeps some of the money and distributes the rest to active contributors according to a subjective assessment of value and work done.
  3. Automate the distribution to make it based on rankings of some sort, or volume of contributions.
  4. Forget about any kind of income at all, and run it on a volunteer not for profit basis.
  5. Make contributions voluntary, and include some revenue directing options so that happy readers can direct cash, or perhaps just applause, to deserving contributors.
  6. Combine 3 and 5 so that there's a special 'That really was outstanding - please pay this person some of my montly subscription' rating option, and then tally up the results at the end of the month and split the spoils accordingly.


Can the last politician to go out the revolving door please turn the lights off?
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Jun 27th, 2007 at 10:57:31 AM EST
[ Parent ]
To which I say: why should there be income?
by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Wed Jun 27th, 2007 at 10:59:15 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Coleman. Is there technically a way of moving this thread, say starting with my post at 1:49 into tonight's open thread? It might be more appreciated there.

Hey, Grandma Moses started late!
by LEP on Wed Jun 27th, 2007 at 11:17:13 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Seconded.  My half a quarter of one intercent's worth is...something Jerome mentioned a while back, to do with non-tangible items (non-resource-extracting items?) becoming a larger part of the economy--to the benefit of the planet.  It ties in with Migeru's comments (if I've understood them at all) with regard to Keynes: that you could bury money in bottles, get people to dig it up and: voila!  An economy.

So all "non resource destroying" activities, such as massage, teaching, or writing articles to the net, can create a self-supporting market, fed at the edges by (sustainable) resource producers, so the writer is paid by the musician who is paid by the farmer who is paid by the writer...that kind of thing.

Or, if our default position is: If you don't want to do it, you don't have to (which is fine for voluntary associations), then when it comes to earning money, we'll all head to the resource-extracting part of the economy.  I suppose we could say, "Anyone can give you a massage if they want"...no, I don't mean that in a sarky way, I mean something bigger: That if "we" (us progressive types) invest in what we think of as quality production, then there will be more quality production money around for us to...use as an alternative to resource depleting money..

So, in a hypothetical, I enjoy your writings to the point where I'm willing to directly pay my ten cents or euros.  However you think I write a pile of disjointed nonsense and prefer the keen wit and cool analysis of Migeru, who in turn favours the writings of That Brit Guy, who is a fan of LEP, who likes whataboutbob, who likes melo...

...and slowly an economy developeth?  There's something about not wanting to pay for things...that...I dunno...someone else can say this more clearly perhaps?

Don't fight forces, use them R. Buckminster Fuller.

by rg (leopold dot lepster at google mail dot com) on Wed Jun 27th, 2007 at 11:25:21 AM EST
[ Parent ]
That is a really cool comment.
My half a quarter of one intercent's worth is...something Jerome mentioned a while back, to do with non-tangible items (non-resource-extracting items?) becoming a larger part of the economy--to the benefit of the planet.  It ties in with Migeru's comments (if I've understood them at all) with regard to Keynes: that you could bury money in bottles, get people to dig it up and: voila!  An economy.
First of all, the bottle example is straight out of Keynes, I'm just quoting. Second, I think the non-tangible part of the economy expands not for the benefit of the planet but for the benefit of employment. The benefit of the planet is a side effect, and is not being realised. However, the point stands that a steady state economy (in terms of resource use) need not be a stationary economy - the service sector in particular has infinite scope for growth and diversification regardless of resource use.


Can the last politician to go out the revolving door please turn the lights off?
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Jun 27th, 2007 at 11:30:48 AM EST
[ Parent ]
For medium sized values of possible, it's not possible.
by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Wed Jun 27th, 2007 at 11:43:57 AM EST
[ Parent ]
And allow me to say at this point that Scoop is a pig to install, especially under Apache2. But it's done now, on the proper host.
by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Wed Jun 27th, 2007 at 11:48:50 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Now, that is a comment that needs to be in the open thread.

Can the last politician to go out the revolving door please turn the lights off?
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Jun 27th, 2007 at 11:50:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Meh, still have to apply the customisations, which is another chunk of work. I should move es.et over as well, if you're going down that route rather than one of your other schemes.
by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Wed Jun 27th, 2007 at 11:51:56 AM EST
[ Parent ]
That's been frozen since I discovered there are other parts of the interface that are broken because the stupid code uses the display value of a button (in English) as the value that gets passed to the server in HTML forms.

I wish I had time for "schemes".

Can the last politician to go out the revolving door please turn the lights off?

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Jun 27th, 2007 at 12:06:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Because the site costs money to run.

Can the last politician to go out the revolving door please turn the lights off?
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Jun 27th, 2007 at 11:20:39 AM EST
[ Parent ]
But that's a very different issue, and order of magnitude, from compensation for work done.
by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Wed Jun 27th, 2007 at 11:44:59 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Hopefully this does incarnate into another thread...sehr interessant! I was ruminating the other day about the idea of our creating our own online college, which would pay for ET and even put coin into people's pockets. The model already exists, so we would just have to research how it is done...and transmogrify it for our own needs.

"Once in awhile we get shown the light, in the strangest of places, if we look at it right" - Hunter/Garcia
by whataboutbob on Wed Jun 27th, 2007 at 03:22:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]
There are many options.

To the 'Why should there be income?' question, one answer is 'Why shouldn't there be?'

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Thu Jun 28th, 2007 at 12:08:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Occasional Series