Edits, votes and bets: Difference between revisions
(redirecting better name) |
(making this a real article too, moving stuff from voting) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
How '''[[edits]], [[voting|votes]] and [[betting|bets]]''' affect the [[Consumerium buying signal]] (via the [[Signal Wiki]] directly and the [[Research Wiki]] indirectly) is up for debate. ''See [[Opinion Wiki]], the old name for the research wiki, for a more complete description of functions.'' | |||
This is probably the design issue that is hardest to resolve, as different [[faction]]s typically view these in quite a different manner. It is possible to manage it as a trusted [[priestly hierarchy]] as [[Wikipedia]] does, but this degrades the [[dissensus]]. It is possible to have [[faction]]s compete in a '''voting''' system, but this values poor contributors as much as good ones. It is possible to create a [[revert currency]] and do [[betting]] in it, or in cash even, but this is just another system suitable for hacking. None of these options is perfect, and combining them in any way creates something new that the [[Consumerium Governance Organization]] can't be quite sure will work. | |||
However, when designing something complex like [[Consumerium]], complex choices have to be made. ''See [[life exchange]] for an example of tough choices that are expressed directly and honestly in such a system, to get an idea of how controversial it might be to relate edits, votes and bets to life and death decisions.'' | |||
Revision as of 16:22, 2 March 2004
How edits, votes and bets affect the Consumerium buying signal (via the Signal Wiki directly and the Research Wiki indirectly) is up for debate. See Opinion Wiki, the old name for the research wiki, for a more complete description of functions.
This is probably the design issue that is hardest to resolve, as different factions typically view these in quite a different manner. It is possible to manage it as a trusted priestly hierarchy as Wikipedia does, but this degrades the dissensus. It is possible to have factions compete in a voting system, but this values poor contributors as much as good ones. It is possible to create a revert currency and do betting in it, or in cash even, but this is just another system suitable for hacking. None of these options is perfect, and combining them in any way creates something new that the Consumerium Governance Organization can't be quite sure will work.
However, when designing something complex like Consumerium, complex choices have to be made. See life exchange for an example of tough choices that are expressed directly and honestly in such a system, to get an idea of how controversial it might be to relate edits, votes and bets to life and death decisions.