Re: [ox-en] There is no such thing like "peer money"
- From: CTVN <coreteam vodes.net>
- Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2008 12:13:57 +0200
I thinking I'm slightly revising my notion of the role of money in peer
production, based on the actual evidence. So bear with me as I develop
thx for this posting. i agree with your main conclusions. money is just a
tool and it depends on what people do with it (how many people on this
list could effectively do "good" had they money?)
imv, the question is not whether or not "money" should be a part of open
movement projects, but how to successfully introduce money and money-like
"creation facilitators" with a view to maximise investment of time,
knowledge, creativity and capital. imv this requires an (i) objective
analysis of the benefits of the investment drivers "money" and
"selbstentfaltung" and its drawbacks, followed (ii) by creative solutions
combining the benefits of the two drivers. much what vn is about.
i perhaps disagree (if i understand your posting correctly) with the lack
of influence of financial contributors and with giving them no control
what happens to the money in order to have "independent maintainers". to
me it seems that - especially in a p2p world with lots of small individual
contributors - its actually very benefitial to let them directly decide
what happens with their money because (i) the influence of the individual
is so small, and (ii) it certainly will stimulate capital investment if
the donator, member, sponsor has some control and influence what happens
to his/her money. i think the danger that the project goes in a single,
community-adverse direction because of payments, simply doesnt exist in a
p2p world because of the numerous micro-investors. whats so bad if people
can distribute their membership fee or donations on specific projects (the
list can be prepared by maintainers)?
thx Franz for pointing me to Andrius by putting your quality on his work.
Contact: projekt oekonux.de