[DVC]DevCoin - Official Thread - Moderated

[weisoq]

Just for my sake, I was referring to a shutdown of pay to ad-generated levels only...it would probably still grow, but it might take a very long time to become a world player. It's difficult to market that, though.

I think you raise a good point about optimizing the devtome payout...do you have any ideas (or anyone else) on other strategies to try? Are the elder admins willing to reconsider it? Do they already have goals in mind with pre-planned payout dropping to non-subsidy levels? Is any of this written down anywhere? Just how exactly are the high level decisions made at the moment? I understand UTB is founding administrator, and has the final nod on everything, but is that as intended? I'm not having a go or anything, just trying to understand what the process is. I know what devcoins are, but what is devcoins?

In that vein...are there any long term strategic pages (on devtome or otherwise) for the intended growth or public charter on the administration of devcoin?

One of the things I like about the devcoin project is that it actually has a system of leadership. It behaves like a benefit corporation, but even those have investors, shares and directors, and don't have their own currency. Alternatively, a regular government has its own currency, performs services for its members and charges a tax to fund it, which devcoins has elements of. Is it sitting in the middle of the two?

I've been making these points since I learned of devcoin. If someone assesses dvc -> btc -> $ payout at greater/equal what they think their work is worth they'll sell. If that worth is 'low' then the price will be in line, whatever anyone else's self-assessed worth may be. DVC like any other means of compensation should be paid in line with work done, value.
-------
Optimisation - market price acts as a good guide. Max per round pay was recently cut from 85 to 50 (I think mostly b/c the rating methodology now bounds from 0.5 to 1.5 rather than an absolute new appraisal). Selling is obviously everyone's prerogative but writers in particular need to be honest with themselves. How many people buy or have bought dvc to support devtome specifically? It's the writers who should be building and supporting devtome, so any subsidy should be from a devtome pot.

This could be done by giving devtome a fixed % of total generation. Then subsidy and any resolutions are forced upon those to who it should be directed. Another way (simplified) is to just cut the max-per-round until a level reached where no writers submit, then raise it a bit. I'd be fascinated to know how many submit b/c they want to share with the world vs how many know it's overpaid and act likewise. There's overlap there but just making a point.

My opinion is that devtome shouldn't pay at all, aside from perhaps a token sum for the effort to format & deal with syntax etc - compensation tied 100% to prospective revenue or simply for recognition and creation's sake. I think there'd be completely different quality, collaboration and marketing. Next best would be if developers get 1 share per round, writers should get the same. It cuts payments but as total shares would be lower not that much if at all for most. I'd be interested to hear why writing is worth more than programming, or software development, or graphic design etc. If it's just a marketing tool then (1) is it working? (2) why are those paying for it everybody except those benefiting?
-------
Leadership - agreed. Regardless of aspirations to total decentralisation that's just not workable. Bitcoin is basically managed by major holders and miners. Devcoin opens that to everyone with a decent contribution, effectively a mining-for-creation network. Achieving that requires a system, decisions and leadership - but ones that are always accountable because at the end of the day we could all just sell and log off.

I don't know if there are other goals. There's an inevitable conflict of interest in change. Writers don't generally want to change the status quo because it's a gravy train, others want change because without it everything's undermined and there won't even be a gravy train. I understand that current winners want to ride this for as long as possible (and I also understand that it's the 'system' so just availing oneself of the system isn't personally blameworthy) but as someone who ultimately pays for it (like every other dvc buyer, owner, earner, trader) it hugely bothers me. I would say exactly the same thing if the situation was with regards to programmers or artists or whatever, rather than writers.

People need to be honest with themselves. I'd like to contact some OS projects and people about devcoin. But I know one of the first things they're going to ask is how we account for and justify relative payouts - and I don't have a good answer. I appreciate that decisions taken are gradual and considered, but as I've said before if something isn't working then it should be changed. Massively changed.

[1715396794]

1715396794

[1715396794]

1715396794

[1715396794]

1715396794

[1715396794]

1715396794

[Hunterbunter]

Wikipedia never paid authors, did it?

So I guess it ran out of content/authors?

Even in relatively early days when pretty much anyone could give themselves a link or few from Wikipedia just by picking a relevant page and editing it to give themselves a link the links alone were valuable, worth becoming and author to get.

I think wikipedia pretty much proves that not paying authors leads to no authors and/or bad content.

True, but it also had around 20-30,000 articles within the first year. Devtome has 2342. Wikipedia was the first such thing on the market, and right now, I don't believe devtome has even found a clear niche. It was clear from the start what wikipedia was - it's in the name. Is devtome a repository for open source software? Fictional writing? Opinion pieces? Encyclopedia? All of them? Tome is actually an ambiguous word, and refers to a particularly large "scholarly" book, which could be anything - although the dev part makes it more...developery. So does that mean it should focus back on open source / developer related things? Programming languages, code snippets for different algorithms, that sort of thing?

How about we try a bounty system for the Devtome project as a whole?

Offer bounties such as "Devtome gets X number of DeVCoin shares if it manages to reach $#### paycheque from Adwords" ?

Have Devtome do its own sharing out of its DeVCoins to its authors any way it wants, but DeVCoin only award minted coins to it when/if it meets specific goals such as a certain sized ad-revenue cheque, a certain average pagerank of its pages, a certain pagerank of its highest ranked page, a certain amount of daily traffic to project X, a certain amount of daily traffic to project Y and suchlike?

Then the authors could work together to try to maximise such features of the Devtome as a whole...

I personally have no problem with testing that, and think that's a good idea. Apart from reaching the bounty (or not), are there any other metrics that would be useful to judge it's comparative success to how it is currently? or is adwords the biggest and brightest indicator?

[notabot]

In regards to generating revenue, increasing the exposure of devcoin, and keeping it circulating in an economy, we need to be proactive and create our own solutions. One of the simplest revenue generating methods is to host an auction site.

There are open source auction packages such as WeBid http://sourceforge.net/projects/simpleauction/ and Xataface http://apps.weblite.ca/index.php?-action=view&-table=packages&package_id=1 that would allow us to make sellers out of anyone, and earn a percentage of each sale. It would also allow another entry point for newcomers that don't have any cryptocurrency.

In addition to accepting devcoins, it could accept other currencies, even fiat, and then buy devcoin with the income. With a decent advertising PR campaign - it could be the auction site that supports creative work. We talk about supporting artists, when and if a system is found that will enable that, well why not an auction site, and let the market determine the artists products worth?

If an auction site was to be considered, in addition to sellers there could be a 'Devcoin Store' that provides unique items, is operated by devcoin, with all proceeds going back into the community. Advertising could be on devtome to start.

EDIT: I am retracting this idea as I don't believe it is in the best interests of devcoin. It could be considered a financial service and attract regulation.

[markm]

Tome is actually an ambiguous word, and refers to a particularly large "scholarly" book, which could be anything - although the dev part makes it more...developery. So does that mean it should focus back on open source / developer related things? Programming languages, code snippets for different algorithms, that sort of thing?

Novacadian told me that when he tried to write on Devtome about his game, he was told such writing did not qualify because the game was not a free open source game.

So from the sound of that yes maybe the things being written about should be free open source things.

I have written a lot about my metagame, but it is all made up of free open source games so it qualifies.

-MarkM-

[weisoq]

Novacadian told me that when he tried to write on Devtome about his game, he was told such writing did not qualify because the game was not a free open source game.

So from the sound of that yes maybe the things being written about should be free open source things.

I have written a lot about my metagame, but it is all made up of free open source games so it qualifies.

-MarkM-

what?? Then 99% of all existing gaming articles, 99% all articles in fact, don't qualify either.

[Flam]

 I think devtome is totally fine (I'm writting on it). First Isn't the goal of Devcoin to build its value based on peoples' work ? You compare Wikipedia with Devtome but the whole purpose of the crypto coins and even more Devcoin is to set a new paradigm. Devcoin is about paying anyone who put time in it. It's the best way to promote it mid long term imo. I saw logic flaws in previous posts. First many guys here seems to have a problem about peoples (writters) dumping coins as the paycheck comes. There is no dumping. The price is just correcting due to the fresh mined coins. Noone ever whined about BTC miners selling their coins on a daily basis or called them dumpers. It's exactly the same here but on a monthly basis. You call them dumpers because you are holding devcoins and the price is actually going down. The price isn't what you want and the only one who is right is the market. The good news for you is that overtime 180M new coins will impact less and less on the price.
You speak about Wikipedia not paying contributors but who said it should be the case ? First this argument is a sophism. Why do we pay peoples for their work as we can enslave them ? Evolution of social rights. Same here. Devtome can override wikipedia in few years just by paying contributors with Devcoin. Also devtome is on of the best way to attract more people to Devcoin (work required/efficiency). If you had to price wikipedia it will go at worst from 2-3 billions to nearly unvaluable. Then the price per word will be suprisingly high. A free lance writter earn 0.1 $ a word easily whereas writting for devtome provides actually less. Devtome is actually a good way to promote devcoin thinking about the amount of works it requires.

cliffs:
1) You totally underestimate what Devtome can become.
2) Dump doesn't exist.

[Hunterbunter]

I've been making these points since I learned of devcoin. If someone assesses dvc -> btc -> $ payout at greater/equal what they think their work is worth they'll sell. If that worth is 'low' then the price will be in line, whatever anyone else's self-assessed worth may be. DVC like any other means of compensation should be paid in line with work done, value.
-------
Optimisation - market price acts as a good guide. Max per round pay was recently cut from 85 to 50 (I think mostly b/c the rating methodology now bounds from 0.5 to 1.5 rather than an absolute new appraisal). Selling is obviously everyone's prerogative but writers in particular need to be honest with themselves. How many people buy or have bought dvc to support devtome specifically? It's the writers who should be building and supporting devtome, so any subsidy should be from a devtome pot.

This could be done by giving devtome a fixed % of total generation. Then subsidy and any resolutions are forced upon those to who it should be directed. Another way (simplified) is to just cut the max-per-round until a level reached where no writers submit, then raise it a bit. I'd be fascinated to know how many submit b/c they want to share with the world vs how many know it's overpaid and act likewise. There's overlap there but just making a point.

My opinion is that devtome shouldn't pay at all, aside from perhaps a token sum for the effort to format & deal with syntax etc - compensation tied 100% to prospective revenue or simply for recognition and creation's sake. I think there'd be completely different quality, collaboration and marketing. Next best would be if developers get 1 share per round, writers should get the same. It cuts payments but as total shares would be lower not that much if at all for most. I'd be interested to hear why writing is worth more than programming, or software development, or graphic design etc. If it's just a marketing tool then (1) is it working? (2) why are those paying for it everybody except those benefiting?
-------
Leadership - agreed. Regardless of aspirations to total decentralisation that's just not workable. Bitcoin is basically managed by major holders and miners. Devcoin opens that to everyone with a decent contribution, effectively a mining-for-creation network. Achieving that requires a system, decisions and leadership - but ones that are always accountable because at the end of the day we could all just sell and log off.

I don't know if there are other goals. There's an inevitable conflict of interest in change. Writers don't generally want to change the status quo because it's a gravy train, others want change because without it everything's undermined and there won't even be a gravy train. I understand that current winners want to ride this for as long as possible (and I also understand that it's the 'system' so just availing oneself of the system isn't personally blameworthy) but as someone who ultimately pays for it (like every other dvc buyer, owner, earner, trader) it hugely bothers me. I would say exactly the same thing if the situation was with regards to programmers or artists or whatever, rather than writers.

People need to be honest with themselves. I'd like to contact some OS projects and people about devcoin. But I know one of the first things they're going to ask is how we account for and justify relative payouts - and I don't have a good answer. I appreciate that decisions taken are gradual and considered, but as I've said before if something isn't working then it should be changed. Massively changed.

These are all good points.

I'm thinking that if the purpose for large devtome subsidy was to try and increase awareness of devcoins, then it has to have had a positive effect (indirectly) on the adwords revenue...but is that the case? What about the number of writers? According to the writer stats, the current price increase hasn't brought with it a huge surge of writers...it's been growing at a rate of around 5-10 new writers per round since round 22. I can probably whip up a graph to show this if anyone wants to see it, but the numbers are there (http://dvccountdown.blisteringdevelopers.com/devtome just search with blank username). That's actually a bit surprising, and tells me the increase in share value doesn't necessarily correspond with more writers to bring its price back down.

The idea that just hit me (and has been mulling in the back of my mind for a while), was the fact that general open source developers are being paid 1 share per round if they maintain approx 10 hours of work a week. At the moment, devtome pays per hour with no cap. If you can output 168 hours of writing a week, even with a cap per round, you still get 168 hours worth of pay over time. An OS developer doing the same only gets paid for the first 10 hours. That's not a leak, that's a hole in the boat. Is the content worth it? I can't find advertising revenue data, all I can find is this link https://github.com/Unthinkingbit/charity/blob/master/devtome_advertising_revenue.csv and it doesn't make much sense to me (plus it's two months old), so it's hard to say. I don't think we should value writers any less than developers (everyone will say their's is the hardest ), but to be fair, the same should apply in reverse. If a writer is willing to commit 10 hours a week of content to devtome, then perhaps they should go on a devtome share list? There can still be bounties and what not for specific work the project needs doing, just like there are with developing, and it would be a much fairer system. This way, to be a devtome contributor would be purely about being rewarded for generally creating freely available work at your own pace. Writers - is that a bad thing? What are your opinions on this? This may directly work against the purpose of the high devtome payouts, but the question is - was it working?

The simple fact is whether developing or writing, people are putting up their time and creative output for the whole world to enjoy for free. I do feel they should be rewarded equally. Bounties will always be there for those who want try to earn more, if they have the time, but fluffing out sentences just to increase word counts shouldn't even be an option (Not all, but I've seen more than a few articles do this).

First Isn't the goal of Devcoin to build its value based on peoples' work ? Devcoin is about paying anyone who put time in it.

That depends on whether you talk to a developer or a writer. The official devcoin line is: "Devcoin is an ethically inspired project based on the BitCoin crypto-currency and created to help fund open source projects created by writers and software developers." The goal is to support open source projects. One way to increase the value of a devcoin for speculation purposes is to build valuable work, but that's not necessarily the goal of the project. Pay is not in question, the rate of pay, is.

Also devtome is on of the best way to attract more people to Devcoin (work required/efficieny).

Based on what metric? How does someone reading about the most popular jazz albums in the 1960s in Minnesota increase awareness of devcoins? The writer might now know about it, but what about the reader? It's not immediately obvious that devcoins even exist from looking at a random article in devtome.

[Flam]

Based on what metric? How does someone reading about the most popular jazz albums in the 1960s in Minnesota increase awareness of devcoins? The writer might now know about it, but what about the reader? It's not immediately obvious that devcoins even exist from looking at a random article in devtome.

It's easy it's all about filling the gap. Let people know they can earn money by writting and they will come to Devtome. To be successful you want as much people as possible involved to into Devcoin. Wrtitting is a simple task to accomplish. Actually many peoples are wrtting for free on wikipedia so devtome is filling the gap paying them for their time. If devtome becomes a reference more peoples will know about devcoin. If it isn't obvious you just have to advertise devcoin on devtome saying something like "earn devcoin by writting here" .
Futhermore I don't know if there is a TOC on wikipipedia. Are the authors of an article the owners of it ? If this is true just let them now that they can be paid puting their work on another encylopedia and then Devtome will grow pretty fast.

And about the rate of pay it's a really complex question. I dont' even know who and how many peoples are involved at setting things here.

[Bittzy78]

In regards to generating revenue, increasing the exposure of devcoin, and keeping it circulating in an economy, we need to be proactive and create our own solutions. One of the simplest revenue generating methods is to host an auction site.

There are open source auction packages such as WeBid http://sourceforge.net/projects/simpleauction/ and Xataface http://apps.weblite.ca/index.php?-action=view&-table=packages&package_id=1 that would allow us to make sellers out of anyone, and earn a percentage of each sale. It would also allow another entry point for newcomers that don't have any cryptocurrency.

In addition to accepting devcoins, it could accept other currencies, even fiat, and then buy devcoin with the income. With a decent advertising PR campaign - it could be the auction site that supports creative work. We talk about supporting artists, when and if a system is found that will enable that, well why not an auction site, and let the market determine the artists products worth?

If an auction site was to be considered, in addition to sellers there could be a 'Devcoin Store' that provides unique items, is operated by devcoin, with all proceeds going back into the community. Advertising could be on devtome to start.

I'd like to propose a bounty for a devcoin auction site.

That raises an interesting question. Is Devtome permanently regulated to anonymous ads status in order to avoid prying taxation eyes? I am leaning towards yes because otherwise, Devtome would probably have to register as a corporation and pay its taxes as a for profit entity. There might be ways to get creative with it (such as charging Devcoins for page sponsorship) but it will probably keep the wiki from ever earning the big bucks.

 

[Bittzy78]

I've been making these points since I learned of devcoin. If someone assesses dvc -> btc -> $ payout at greater/equal what they think their work is worth they'll sell. If that worth is 'low' then the price will be in line, whatever anyone else's self-assessed worth may be. DVC like any other means of compensation should be paid in line with work done, value.
-------
Optimisation - market price acts as a good guide. Max per round pay was recently cut from 85 to 50 (I think mostly b/c the rating methodology now bounds from 0.5 to 1.5 rather than an absolute new appraisal). Selling is obviously everyone's prerogative but writers in particular need to be honest with themselves. How many people buy or have bought dvc to support devtome specifically? It's the writers who should be building and supporting devtome, so any subsidy should be from a devtome pot.

This could be done by giving devtome a fixed % of total generation. Then subsidy and any resolutions are forced upon those to who it should be directed. Another way (simplified) is to just cut the max-per-round until a level reached where no writers submit, then raise it a bit. I'd be fascinated to know how many submit b/c they want to share with the world vs how many know it's overpaid and act likewise. There's overlap there but just making a point.

My opinion is that devtome shouldn't pay at all, aside from perhaps a token sum for the effort to format & deal with syntax etc - compensation tied 100% to prospective revenue or simply for recognition and creation's sake. I think there'd be completely different quality, collaboration and marketing. Next best would be if developers get 1 share per round, writers should get the same. It cuts payments but as total shares would be lower not that much if at all for most. I'd be interested to hear why writing is worth more than programming, or software development, or graphic design etc. If it's just a marketing tool then (1) is it working? (2) why are those paying for it everybody except those benefiting?
-------
Leadership - agreed. Regardless of aspirations to total decentralisation that's just not workable. Bitcoin is basically managed by major holders and miners. Devcoin opens that to everyone with a decent contribution, effectively a mining-for-creation network. Achieving that requires a system, decisions and leadership - but ones that are always accountable because at the end of the day we could all just sell and log off.

I don't know if there are other goals. There's an inevitable conflict of interest in change. Writers don't generally want to change the status quo because it's a gravy train, others want change because without it everything's undermined and there won't even be a gravy train. I understand that current winners want to ride this for as long as possible (and I also understand that it's the 'system' so just availing oneself of the system isn't personally blameworthy) but as someone who ultimately pays for it (like every other dvc buyer, owner, earner, trader) it hugely bothers me. I would say exactly the same thing if the situation was with regards to programmers or artists or whatever, rather than writers.

People need to be honest with themselves. I'd like to contact some OS projects and people about devcoin. But I know one of the first things they're going to ask is how we account for and justify relative payouts - and I don't have a good answer. I appreciate that decisions taken are gradual and considered, but as I've said before if something isn't working then it should be changed. Massively changed.

These are all good points.

I'm thinking that if the purpose for large devtome subsidy was to try and increase awareness of devcoins, then it has to have had a positive effect (indirectly) on the adwords revenue...but is that the case? What about the number of writers? According to the writer stats, the current price increase hasn't brought with it a huge surge of writers...it's been growing at a rate of around 5-10 new writers per round since round 22. I can probably whip up a graph to show this if anyone wants to see it, but the numbers are there (http://dvccountdown.blisteringdevelopers.com/devtome just search with blank username). That's actually a bit surprising, and tells me the increase in share value doesn't necessarily correspond with more writers to bring its price back down.

The idea that just hit me (and has been mulling in the back of my mind for a while), was the fact that general open source developers are being paid 1 share per round if they maintain approx 10 hours of work a week. At the moment, devtome pays per hour with no cap. If you can output 168 hours of writing a week, even with a cap per round, you still get 168 hours worth of pay over time. An OS developer doing the same only gets paid for the first 10 hours. That's not a leak, that's a hole in the boat. Is the content worth it? I can't find advertising revenue data, all I can find is this link https://github.com/Unthinkingbit/charity/blob/master/devtome_advertising_revenue.csv and it doesn't make much sense to me (plus it's two months old), so it's hard to say. I don't think we should value writers any less than developers (everyone will say their's is the hardest ), but to be fair, the same should apply in reverse. If a writer is willing to commit 10 hours a week of content to devtome, then perhaps they should go on a devtome share list? There can still be bounties and what not for specific work the project needs doing, just like there are with developing, and it would be a much fairer system. This way, to be a devtome contributor would be purely about being rewarded for generally creating freely available work at your own pace. Writers - is that a bad thing? What are your opinions on this? This may directly work against the purpose of the high devtome payouts, but the question is - was it working?

The simple fact is whether developing or writing, people are putting up their time and creative output for the whole world to enjoy for free. I do feel they should be rewarded equally. Bounties will always be there for those who want try to earn more, if they have the time, but fluffing out sentences just to increase word counts shouldn't even be an option (Not all, but I've seen more than a few articles do this).

First Isn't the goal of Devcoin to build its value based on peoples' work ? Devcoin is about paying anyone who put time in it.

That depends on whether you talk to a developer or a writer. The official devcoin line is: "Devcoin is an ethically inspired project based on the BitCoin crypto-currency and created to help fund open source projects created by writers and software developers." The goal is to support open source projects. One way to increase the value of a devcoin for speculation purposes is to build valuable work, but that's not necessarily the goal of the project. Pay is not in question, the rate of pay, is.

Also devtome is on of the best way to attract more people to Devcoin (work required/efficieny).

Based on what metric? How does someone reading about the most popular jazz albums in the 1960s in Minnesota increase awareness of devcoins? The writer might now know about it, but what about the reader? It's not immediately obvious that devcoins even exist from looking at a random article in devtome.

A small percentage of people will be interested to find out what site they landed on and what that green "D" is all about on their upper left. If they investigate further, an even smaller percentage of people will end up writing for Devtome.

[Flam]

As I said you just have to advertise devcoin on devtome.
The focus should really be on Devtome. It's the project that will require the less work to spread devcoin around the globe. You have to take things step by step. Actually you can't do "DevTube" as an example it will require a big amount of money to start with. It will cost a big amount of money to maintain it and you will even have to pay devtubers  a big amount of money to be more attractive than Youtube.
Actually Devtome can become the crypto wikipiedia without too many energy spent. Then the market will grow and you can do another project and evantually the spaceship.

[psybits]

It's time for another DVC press release

Please PM me with any ideas you might have re what should be mentioned in the upcoming press release.

Is the new windows QT wallet up yet on the website? Can someone please give me the download link?

I was thinking of focussing this press release on the new windows QT wallet and the redesign of the Devcoin.org website

[weisoq]

...The idea that just hit me (and has been mulling in the back of my mind for a while), was the fact that general open source developers are being paid 1 share per round if they maintain approx 10 hours of work a week. At the moment, devtome pays per hour with no cap. If you can output 168 hours of writing a week, even with a cap per round, you still get 168 hours worth of pay over time. An OS developer doing the same only gets paid for the first 10 hours. That's not a leak, that's a hole in the boat. Is the content worth it? I can't find advertising revenue data, all I can find is this link https://github.com/Unthinkingbit/charity/blob/master/devtome_advertising_revenue.csv and it doesn't make much sense to me (plus it's two months old), so it's hard to say. I don't think we should value writers any less than developers (everyone will say their's is the hardest ), but to be fair, the same should apply in reverse. If a writer is willing to commit 10 hours a week of content to devtome, then perhaps they should go on a devtome share list? There can still be bounties and what not for specific work the project needs doing, just like there are with developing, and it would be a much fairer system. This way, to be a devtome contributor would be purely about being rewarded for generally creating freely available work at your own pace. Writers - is that a bad thing? What are your opinions on this? This may directly work against the purpose of the high devtome payouts, but the question is - was it working?

The simple fact is whether developing or writing, people are putting up their time and creative output for the whole world to enjoy for free. I do feel they should be rewarded equally. Bounties will always be there for those who want try to earn more, if they have the time, but fluffing out sentences just to increase word counts shouldn't even be an option (Not all, but I've seen more than a few articles do this).

This pretty much sums up my opinion.

[Flam]

If you think that devs will be more useful than writters just pay them with a static converted amount of dollars and not shares.
you just have to pay them xxx dollars for the task you want. It will be easy to scale things too. But in another side you do not accomplish anything new in the relation people/money/work through devcoin.

[weisoq]

I think devtome is totally fine (I'm writting on it). First Isn't the goal of Devcoin to build its value based on peoples' work ? You compare Wikipedia with Devtome but the whole purpose of the crypto coins and even more Devcoin is to set a new paradigm. Devcoin is about paying anyone who put time in it. It's the best way to promote it mid long term imo. I saw logic flaws in previous posts. First many guys here seems to have a problem about peoples (writters) dumping coins as the paycheck comes. There is no dumping. The price is just correcting due to the fresh mined coins. Noone ever whined about BTC miners selling their coins on a daily basis or called them dumpers. It's exactly the same here but on a monthly basis. You call them dumpers because you are holding devcoins and the price is actually going down. The price isn't what you want and the only one who is right is the market. The good news for you is that overtime 180M new coins will impact less and less on the price.
You speak about Wikipedia not paying contributors but who said it should be the case ? First this argument is a sophism. Why do we pay peoples for their work as we can enslave them ? Evolution of social rights. Same here. Devtome can override wikipedia in few years just by paying contributors with Devcoin. Also devtome is on of the best way to attract more people to Devcoin (work required/efficiency). If you had to price wikipedia it will go at worst from 2-3 billions to nearly unvaluable. Then the price per word will be suprisingly high. A free lance writter earn 0.1 $ a word easily whereas writting for devtome provides actually less. Devtome is actually a good way to promote devcoin thinking about the amount of works it requires.

cliffs:
1) You totally underestimate what Devtome can become.
2) Dump doesn't exist.

My view isn't price related. I can't have an issue with people selling per se, that's up to them - it's a market - and if someone else earned the coins instead of writers they could still sell just the same. I've been saying this when the price has been (relatively) high or low. I actually don't really care what the price is, only that (1) earnings are commensurate with work; (2) relative earnings are fair across fields. If the nominal price was half what it is now but devcoin was valued as a globally recognised and utilised payment method then that would be a success. My issue is people acquiring a justifiable return in the context of the real world and the alternatives that return could have been used for/spent on instead.

Devtome promotes writers. But as hunterbunter says it doesn't necessarily promote buyers. That's not the same thing. When's the last time anyone donated to wikipedia because they used and valued the output? Yes devtome and devcoin could change that, but right now we should be resolving today's realities and making sure we do everything possible to build everything devcoin without resource cannibalisation.

Perhaps an objective observer would say you think devtome is totally fine because you're writing on it. Another way to correct the imbalances would be to hike all other relative shares, but the end result would be exactly the same. And as the long-term intention has to be increased participation it would also limit division so pointless to do it that way.

[Orgcoin.org]

Was trying to go through some more recent / updated devcoin sources.
Stumbled on this.
http://sourceforge.net/projects/devcoin/

Not positive but I don't think it's legit.  The first thing that caught my attention was the .jar packaging.
Figured I'd bring it to the attention of the DevCoin community.

[sidhujag]

Was trying to go through some more recent / updated devcoin sources.
Stumbled on this.
http://sourceforge.net/projects/devcoin/

Not positive but I don't think it's legit.  The first thing that caught my attention was the .jar packaging.
Figured I'd bring it to the attention of the DevCoin community.

Its the new official sources to devcoin it is the cross platform java installer.. will be a web installer on devcoin.org soon.. have a read of the code please read the android code too... code is on github/sidhujag... I used sourceforge just to distriubute my test releases since its not finalized.

[sidhujag]

It's time for another DVC press release

Please PM me with any ideas you might have re what should be mentioned in the upcoming press release.

Is the new windows QT wallet up yet on the website? Can someone please give me the download link?

I was thinking of focussing this press release on the new windows QT wallet and the redesign of the Devcoin.org website

Im making sure its merge minable and then putting it up on devcoin.org as a web installer.. latest one is on sourceforge as 1.0.12... above link.

Dont forget the android wallet too want some screenshots? Useful is the bluetooth nfc and qr code payments.. which is all new to us.

point of sale is now possible with devcoin.

[sidhujag]

Just for my sake, I was referring to a shutdown of pay to ad-generated levels only...it would probably still grow, but it might take a very long time to become a world player. It's difficult to market that, though.

I think you raise a good point about optimizing the devtome payout...do you have any ideas (or anyone else) on other strategies to try? Are the elder admins willing to reconsider it? Do they already have goals in mind with pre-planned payout dropping to non-subsidy levels? Is any of this written down anywhere? Just how exactly are the high level decisions made at the moment? I understand UTB is founding administrator, and has the final nod on everything, but is that as intended? I'm not having a go or anything, just trying to understand what the process is. I know what devcoins are, but what is devcoins?

In that vein...are there any long term strategic pages (on devtome or otherwise) for the intended growth or public charter on the administration of devcoin?

One of the things I like about the devcoin project is that it actually has a system of leadership. It behaves like a benefit corporation, but even those have investors, shares and directors, and don't have their own currency. Alternatively, a regular government has its own currency, performs services for its members and charges a tax to fund it, which devcoins has elements of. Is it sitting in the middle of the two?

I've been making these points since I learned of devcoin. If someone assesses dvc -> btc -> $ payout at greater/equal what they think their work is worth they'll sell. If that worth is 'low' then the price will be in line, whatever anyone else's self-assessed worth may be. DVC like any other means of compensation should be paid in line with work done, value.
-------
Optimisation - market price acts as a good guide. Max per round pay was recently cut from 85 to 50 (I think mostly b/c the rating methodology now bounds from 0.5 to 1.5 rather than an absolute new appraisal). Selling is obviously everyone's prerogative but writers in particular need to be honest with themselves. How many people buy or have bought dvc to support devtome specifically? It's the writers who should be building and supporting devtome, so any subsidy should be from a devtome pot.

This could be done by giving devtome a fixed % of total generation. Then subsidy and any resolutions are forced upon those to who it should be directed. Another way (simplified) is to just cut the max-per-round until a level reached where no writers submit, then raise it a bit. I'd be fascinated to know how many submit b/c they want to share with the world vs how many know it's overpaid and act likewise. There's overlap there but just making a point.

My opinion is that devtome shouldn't pay at all, aside from perhaps a token sum for the effort to format & deal with syntax etc - compensation tied 100% to prospective revenue or simply for recognition and creation's sake. I think there'd be completely different quality, collaboration and marketing. Next best would be if developers get 1 share per round, writers should get the same. It cuts payments but as total shares would be lower not that much if at all for most. I'd be interested to hear why writing is worth more than programming, or software development, or graphic design etc. If it's just a marketing tool then (1) is it working? (2) why are those paying for it everybody except those benefiting?
-------
Leadership - agreed. Regardless of aspirations to total decentralisation that's just not workable. Bitcoin is basically managed by major holders and miners. Devcoin opens that to everyone with a decent contribution, effectively a mining-for-creation network. Achieving that requires a system, decisions and leadership - but ones that are always accountable because at the end of the day we could all just sell and log off.

I don't know if there are other goals. There's an inevitable conflict of interest in change. Writers don't generally want to change the status quo because it's a gravy train, others want change because without it everything's undermined and there won't even be a gravy train. I understand that current winners want to ride this for as long as possible (and I also understand that it's the 'system' so just availing oneself of the system isn't personally blameworthy) but as someone who ultimately pays for it (like every other dvc buyer, owner, earner, trader) it hugely bothers me. I would say exactly the same thing if the situation was with regards to programmers or artists or whatever, rather than writers.

People need to be honest with themselves. I'd like to contact some OS projects and people about devcoin. But I know one of the first things they're going to ask is how we account for and justify relative payouts - and I don't have a good answer. I appreciate that decisions taken are gradual and considered, but as I've said before if something isn't working then it should be changed. Massively changed.

This is good and id like to point out what markm said that we can use to help motivate writers more
by offering goals to devtome like he said in his post before yours... if we define clear metrics then devtome will look for efficiency which is what we want out of any bounty just like a corporation.

So questuon is where would the rest ofthe coins go? ie now we would have more for bounties but not many bounties to cover that much?

I also think new bounties to be made which focus of revenue generation as crucial to devcoins success.. if we allow more shares for bounties by nudging devtome metrics then this will be possible. Once we have revenue generating things put in place we will see sustained rises of interest in the project.

Hunterbunter said this wont work because its a race to the bottom.. I dont agree. If devcoin owns these ventures then only they benefit and any competition is a healthy process of making better service or products.. its a deflationary process just like bitcoin itself. Think consumer electronics... but devcoin is able to improve and get better while others may not have funding and left behind.

The market advantage to use a devcoim funded revenue generating service is that it is just that. The consumer will know it will be improved and be leader if competition arises since devcoin has gauranteed funding through shares.

[Flam]

My view isn't price related. I can't have an issue with people selling per se, that's up to them - it's a market - and if someone else earned the coins instead of writers they could still sell just the same. I've been saying this when the price has been (relatively) high or low. I actually don't really care what the price is, only that (1) earnings are commensurate with work; (2) relative earnings are fair across fields. If the nominal price was half what it is now but devcoin was valued as a globally recognised and utilised payment method then that would be a success. My issue is people acquiring a justifiable return in the context of the real world and the alternatives that return could have been used for/spent on instead.

Devtome promotes writers. But as hunterbunter says it doesn't necessarily promote buyers. That's not the same thing. When's the last time anyone donated to wikipedia because they used and valued the output? Yes devtome and devcoin could change that, but right now we should be resolving today's realities and making sure we do everything possible to build everything devcoin without resource cannibalisation.

Perhaps an objective observer would say you think devtome is totally fine because you're writing on it. Another way to correct the imbalances would be to hike all other relative shares, but the end result would be exactly the same. And as the long-term intention has to be increased participation it would also limit division so pointless to do it that way.

When I said that it is totally fine I thought about the principle and the timing for this project related to devcoin lifetime. I had to say that in opposition to Markm point of view who said that wiki do not pay contributors (so it has to be the same for devtome) It's against how I see devcoin and won't help it in the long run.
About devtome and buyers. Devtome will provide at least traffic and then a converted percentage will adopt devoin. Is it the best way to promote devcoin maybe not but to me it's not a hard way to do. We also have to know what the purpose of devcoin now. is it to grow it's econmy as fast as possible or is it to possibly give an income to anyone who get involved in ? At the end the more people in the most succesful it will be. the use of "you" was a generic term too :à. Also it's not a real problem if writters take most shares then sold it right away. It's just a way to spread the money on the market. The value of devcoin will come from what utility it can provide  to anyone. So the main board just have to choose how he want to spread the wealth.
At the end any crypto with a real value against bitcoin will suceed no matter how it is distribued.