Jump to content

Edits, votes and bets: Difference between revisions

expanding a bit, turning into a list of possibly non-exclusive options
(making this a real article too, moving stuff from voting)
(expanding a bit, turning into a list of possibly non-exclusive options)
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.''
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, though it includes some that may have to be separated, like [[Campaign]]s.''


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.
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]], annoys [[trolls]] and is very fragile, as it can easily be infiltrated by a [[funded troll]] who can [[block IP]] of those who oppose eir client.
 
*It is possible to have [[faction]]s compete in a '''voting''' system, but this values poor contributors as much as good ones based on [[politics as usual]]It could degrade to a simple popularity contest, and popular companies that do extremely nasty things championed by popular people will evade much scrutiny.
 
*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.''
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.''
Anonymous user
We use only those cookies necessary for the functioning of the website.