| Message 03283 | [Homepage] | [Navigation] | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Thread: oxenT02962 Message: 24/46 L17 | [In index] | ||
| [First in Thread] | [Last in Thread] | [Date Next] | [Date Prev] |
| [Next in Thread] | [Prev in Thread] | [Next Thread] | [Prev Thread] |
[Converted from multipart/alternative]
[1 text/plain]
Markus: just a precision regarding dominique pelbois: in his system, consumers would have more voting power than producers, since income must be higher than expense (salaries, etc..) in order for any enterprise to survive,
Michel
Markus <markus vodes.net> wrote:
Hi Michel,
many thanks for this info. if you decide to join Team Beta tester and
publish this in the BT Forum in this thread
(http://vodes.net/betatforum/index.php?topic=9.0) you get one Information
Vode (T) accredited to your account. you can exchange it into money after
the cva has taken place. the second main function of iv (which you are
presumable more interested in) is to measure knowledge of a community
member in a particular area (T stands for theory). over the long run, this
will be a criteria to invite people for positions requiring knowledge in
that particular area (iv-"T" for the interest fraction "rationality" in
this particular case).
i like the term liberal communism. i think this pretty much describes our
main believes. will do a google on this.
regarding the consumer participation, its the very same idea. however (if
Dominique does not include other forces), i think a simply
"consumer/user-producer" participation often would create a stale-mate
situation because those interests are diametrically opposed; especially if
both interests have an equal voting power i think its difficult to
implement in practise.
therefore, we included five major "production
forces" and gave them an equal 20% voting power on the decisions. in many
decisions, theoretically at least, there is an unbiased 60% (e.g.
rationality, vn people and open movement on the decision on the price of
the personal line of code as it primarily affects user and artists)
"voting power buffer". so despite adding more interests, the splitting of
powers and the non-affection of a large interest fraction might be
benefitial for getting the necessary focus and allow for effective
decisionmaking. perhaps at least.
markus
On Thu, 06 Apr 2006 11:44:30 [PHONE NUMBER REMOVED], Michael Bouwens
wrote:
[Converted from multipart/alternative] [1 text/plain] This is not directly related to the contribution, but to the general topic. I once read a book Liberal Communism, by Dominique Pelbois. Innovative in this utopian scheme, was the integration of consumers in the decision-making process of enterprises. In other words, they would be co-owned by producers and consumers. I think that this is a very valid point. The community in free software should not just be those that contribute, but those that use it. This avoids any selfishness in policy making. The market then becomes the internal dialogue of the community, rather than an external impersonal mechanism. In June, when I will start thinking about a governance process for the p2p foundation, I will certainly strive to integrate the community of users, into the governance process. Michel Markus wrote: there are two issues here: 1), who should get something and how much in the case of the mozilla foundation; 2), whether there should be a "killer application" open source software to the benefit of the whole community; not owned by a private entity but by representatives of the community. now, i see this list as an appropriate (because its long term) forum to pose this question. dont get paid) yet they dont get anything back.That's bullshit. They get back improvements and bugfixes to firefox,as for 1), true and defenitely you have a valid point. you very well can be satisfied with this. and given the upfront investment of aol this seems indeed fair. however, i have to admit that my desire to see open source successful something has a negative impact on my objectivity. apologies. luckily there are people like you who reveal this. regarding 2, personally, i believe that a browser with such revenue potential could be of much more help to the overall success of open source. but i see that not many inhere share this believe. perhaps over time ill see if im wrong. right now im stubborn.paid for by the ad revenue and donations. 40(?) members of staff don't work for free you know.i specifically mentioned the beta testers and not the 35 staff members of the mozilla for-profit corporation. as i said, i asked for some insight how many people (beta tester, people who write translations, extenstions etc) invest their time into the development of mozilla for no exchange of money. _________________________________ Web-Site: http://www.oekonux.org/ Organization: http://www.oekonux.de/projekt/ Contact: projekt oekonux.de --------------------------------- Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. PC-to-Phone calls for ridiculously low rates. [2 text/html] _________________________________ Web-Site: http://www.oekonux.org/ Organization: http://www.oekonux.de/projekt/ Contact: projekt oekonux.de
_________________________________ Web-Site: http://www.oekonux.org/ Organization: http://www.oekonux.de/projekt/ Contact: projekt oekonux.de --------------------------------- New Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Call regular phones from your PC and save big. [2 text/html] _________________________________ Web-Site: http://www.oekonux.org/ Organization: http://www.oekonux.de/projekt/ Contact: projekt oekonux.de
| Thread: oxenT02962 Message: 24/46 L17 | [In index] | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Message 03283 | [Homepage] | [Navigation] | |