Tags
The other day, I noticed that fundraising platform Kickstarter introduced ‘Curated Pages,’ a way for arts and cultural institutions to feature projects they like on the site. As you know, we’re doing our Future of Facebook Project on Kickstarter, and the ability to showcase other projects you think are cool is a neat feature.
The timing this feature rollout was interesting to me, because I had just been thinking it would be fun to be able to be able to highlight projects that resonate with me on my own website. And perhaps receive a small percentage for every transaction that occurred via my site.
Affiliate programs of all stripes exist around the web – I see them a lot for ebooks (zenhabits offers 50% commission to sell his digital products), and then there’s the Amazon Associates program, which lets you earn up to 15% in referrals if you advertise their products.
But here’s an idea I haven’t seen yet – affiliate crowdfunding.
But what if you could support the fundraising efforts for creative projects and initiatives for social good by posting a widget to your site, and earn a small percentage when a donation was made?
Of course, most crowdfunding platforms currently charge between 8 – 10% to use their service already. Kickstarter, for example, charges a 5% fee, plus it passes on the transaction fees charges by Amazon Payments, their payment service of choice. So tacking on an affiliate fee onto that structure may not make sense for the individual or group trying to raise funds. On the other hand, some would argue that every little bit helps.
What would be interesting is a platform that doesn’t automatically charge that 5% flat fee, combined with a transaction platform that doesn’t gouge you for another 3-5%.
I took a look around, and there actually are a few examples of crowdfunding platforms that take no fees. One is Beex.org, an open source challenge based fundraising platform created in PHP/MySQL by a nonprofit, the Sarapis Foundation. They charge no fees for transactions, and the tool works with Paypal. Another service that takes no fees is Kapipal.
I wonder if a service like Beex.org could be modified to allow a user to enter in a % they would take for promoting a crowdfunding campaign on their site. To keep things from getting exploitative, that % would have to be transparent to the public, and would be based on an agreement made by the fundraisers and the affiliate. Then combine that with a payment service, either online or mobile, that charges a very small fee for transactions.
I can think of a lot of projects I would love to see get off the ground – from open source projects to sustainability initiatives to social enterprise and business ideas – all things I believe in. This would be a mechanism that would help get those things funded, while also supporting an affiliate’s effort to promote them. On a larger scale, it would be cool to see this kind of thing appear on huge sites with massive traffic.
Perhaps it would create a category of advertising that directs people’s attention (and microdonations!) in a socially useful way, verse just encouraging people to consume more stuff. 🙂
emergent by design 
I think this is a brilliant idea Venessa – I like that the % would be transparent too.
That’s a really interesting idea.
We have just launched http://www.advertactivist.com – a crowd funding platform that helps fund advertising campaigns that carry a positive social message. It would certainly be an idea we would be interesting in hearing about.
Just a side thought – affiliates would only be able to make money on bigger donations.
cool idea
“Then combine that will a payment service, either online or mobile, that charges a very small fee for transactions.”
That’s been clear to me now for a few years. The reasons actually go back to the roots of transaction and the need to facilitate especially those that have been problematic since we moved from a hunter-gatherer existence.
In fact some transactions need to be unburdened as nearly completely as possible… and the hidden burdens on all kinds of transactions have are largely unrecognized and have been problematic for a very long time.
As we are seeing, the unburdening of other transactions… whether via voice, image or written word (all these forms essentially constitute a significant restoration of proximity) is having profound effects around the world.
Over two years ago I wrote the following as part of laying out the rationale for what I believe is a needed SIMPLE financial innovation.
…that the fundamental challenge for a collective decision-making process facing for ANY social organism attempting to scale beyond hunter-gatherer limits on size is finding a way to accomplish “THE CLEAR ALIGNMENT OF SELF-INTEREST, RESPONSIBILITY AND THE GROUP (the target of biological altruism)
Civilization, Complexity & Collapse – The Search for Levers
http://culturalengineer.blogspot.com/2009/02/civilization-complexity-search-for.html
While one would hope that it would be the role of governments to protect both the Commons as well as the rights of the individual, there seems to be some difficulty accomplishing that.
This shouldn’t be surprising… yet why is largely unaddressed.
My believe is that part of the reason for that is an imbalance in the forces impinging on the decisions governments make… (there’s never a perfect balance nor a perfectly wise constituency; however our problem here is unaddressed systemic imbalances which become self-reinforcing with no mechanisms for correction…
So an additional reason is the lack of any powerful institutional structures with both the will and the capability to check those influences.
I also believe there are problems with banking going to its very roots and would like to see some more broadly-held structure capable of competing for some of those functions.
Hence the simple but pragmatic proposal for the Commons-dedicated Account under some sort of universal ownership… The viability for such a concept centers around reducing transaction costs in particular areas to facilitate needed activity in those areas (e.g. networked citizen lobbying via a viable micro-transaction) by achieving monetization elsewhere (as well as generally not being as greedy as a matter of corporate POLICY… new examples must be set.)
On the Birth of the Global Social Organism http://culturalengineer.blogspot.com/2009/05/on-birth-of-global-social-organism.html
The back office and demo for the platform you speak of has already been built in basic form (In my opinion)… I don’t believe anyone from this circle has tried it. I welcome your critique. (Not on the crude website design but on the concepts (and fully-built back-office) behind it.)
Further the resultant network – which can be catalyzed via either one or multiple associated, similar networks – engenders a number of ’emergent by design’ characteristics which are vitally needed…
No, I don’t believe its the answer to all the worlds problems… but its a key part (along with ICT in general) of the re-connection to p2p capabilities lost for a few thousand years… and which are and will continue to be problematic with scale.
I have to add that this concept (like democracy and freedom) has dangers to it… it requires some thought. It would be great if this community had something to add… the silence from these quarters is deafening.
I honestly welcome questions, confusions (I often skip steps in explanations since there’s so much to cover), criticisms and challenges. My interest is in cultural evolution and what advances or retards it. I’m taking what I think is an interesting and needed look at the real roots of economics and politics (their academic division is recent, wrong, artificial and enormously damaging)…
Which is why I talk about money as a “decision technology”… and how viewing it that way may be more helpful than as a “store of value”. (and not just in the context of campaign finance)
Or why I contend a fundamental problem with markets as universal solutions to economic decision has to do with the constraints of the human lifespan and how that affects those market decisions.
Or why I suggest that an unaddressed problem is the disconnection between “intellectual altruism” (which is about universal empathy)…
and “biological altruism” where altruism is only HALF the story… the drive is actually about distinguishing in-group from out-group for purposes of survival advantage… (which has a connection to Dunbar’s Number and is behind a huge problem is scaling social structures)…
SO… on the flip side, altruism can also justify incredible insensitivity, brutality and has subtler effects on collective decision not so easily recognized but just as damaging.
Enough here now. Its all a work in progress… and likely to evolve… I’m an explorer trying to create a map for a developing landscape… not a man with a map trying to insist that you follow it… though taking a look at it and the ideas behind it might be nice.
hey tom,
thanks for the lengthy response. i read it, as well as both the links you provided, and i’m having a hard time understanding what you’re talking about. 😦
“the hidden burdens on all kinds of transactions have are largely unrecognized and have been problematic for a very long time”
what are you referring to?
“…that the fundamental challenge for a collective decision-making process facing for ANY social organism attempting to scale beyond hunter-gatherer limits on size is finding a way to accomplish “THE CLEAR ALIGNMENT OF SELF-INTEREST, RESPONSIBILITY AND THE GROUP”
ok, i think i understand. are you just saying that there should be a moral/ethical framework in place for decision-making? that there should be a vision, mission, and enlightened self-interest? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enlightened_self-interest). if so, sure, i agree with that.
“While one would hope that it would be the role of governments to protect both the Commons as well as the rights of the individual, there seems to be some difficulty accomplishing that.
This shouldn’t be surprising… yet why is largely unaddressed.”
because of corruption and fulfilling the interests of corporations and lobbyists instead of the people?
“Hence the simple but pragmatic proposal for the Commons-dedicated Account under some sort of universal ownership… The viability for such a concept centers around reducing transaction costs in particular areas to facilitate needed activity in those areas ”
sorry, i don’t know what this is.
“The back office and demo for the platform you speak of has already been built in basic form (In my opinion)… I don’t believe anyone from this circle has tried it. I welcome your critique.”
again, not sure what you’re referring to.
sorry tom, i’m really trying to follow what you’re saying, but i’m having a hard time understanding what it is you’re suggesting. creating a microtransaction platform for campaign finance? sorry, just really confused. maybe you can try explaining again what kind of system you’re envisioning.
– venessa
The need for an open source crowd funding solution as dynamic as a CMS with the ability to join federations of deployments and integrate with all types of existing and as yet undeveloped currency systems is of the utmost importance. The idea that we can or should fund the open source evolution using a proprietary, venture-backed, exclusionary platform that charges excessive fees in crazy. We need to build our own.
BEEx.org may of may not be the best starting point but the BEEx team is ready, willing and able to invest time and money into an open source platform that meets this obvious and essential need.
Yes, I think that affiliate crowdfunding is a great idea and it creates an economic incentive for content creators to identify projects worth funding. This could be a great revenue model for activist/journalists.
Thanks for feedback!
At least I can begin to see where confusion may lie… and must take my responsibility for it.
RE:
““the hidden burdens on all kinds of transactions have are largely unrecognized and have been problematic for a very long time”
As hunter-gatherers our circles were very small… we lived our whole lives with a small group of people…
Life, then as now was full of transactions… but without money, telephones, advertisements, etc.
Transactions (then as now) for those in our immediate circle required no technical mediation… words, gestures, facial expressions, contexts provided by personal histories relating to reliability, trust, etc. all required no technical assistance.
The ‘commercial transaction’ is a relatively new phenomenon and only arose (as an organized ‘technology’) with the move to settled agriculture and the need for ‘non-proximate’ transactions…
The ‘facebook’ revolution (engendered also by cell phones, the Web, other social platforms, etc.)… is the result of a technology beginning to unburden social transaction costs…
The ability for people to feel ‘proximate’ to not only their fellow countrymen, but to the lives and ways-of-living of those very far away sparks an awareness of much of the artificiality of the hierarchies keeping them down.
The effects of the easing of these “hidden burdens” on transaction are only beginning to be realized. The reason the burdens on these transactions have not been recognized is that they’ve been around since the move from hunterd-gatherer existence… and only very, very recently are beginning to be eased.
This has not yet occurred with finance and is much needed. (I’ll be happy to explain why if that’s also needed.)
RE:
“…that the fundamental challenge for a collective decision-making process facing for ANY social organism attempting to scale beyond hunter-gatherer limits on size is finding a way to accomplish “THE CLEAR ALIGNMENT OF SELF-INTEREST, RESPONSIBILITY AND THE GROUP”
While you’re in general correct to say… ” there should be a moral/ethical framework in place for decision-making? that there should be a vision, mission, and enlightened self-interest?”
That isn’t my point… my point is that the success or failure in accomplishing that goal is related to the technologies through which you attempt to accomplish them… and more specifically as regards government and economics… how these technologies deal with the altruism problem and scale…
In large organizations (of any type) governance suffers where those governing lose personal identification with those they govern. Its why Jared Diamond talked about the import of decision makers being personally affected by their decisions and how that relates to collapse…
While I doubt this will answer all your questons about what the hell the “altruism problem” is that this whacko is talking about…
It has to do with the simple truism of why we’re more ‘biologically’ disconcerted by the death of our dog… than by the starvation of 100,000 in a far part of the world… and why our evolution and social health actually demands that (or else we’d all be literally prostrate with grief every day and no scaled human society could survive long…) but why it still must be addressed.
It’s also, btw, why Lloyd Blankfein quite likely honestly believe he IS doing God’s work…
That’s what designs of government are SUPPOSED to be all about (and those designs are technologies)… aligning self-interest, responsibility and the group.
RE:
““While one would hope that it would be the role of governments to protect both the Commons as well as the rights of the individual, there seems to be some difficulty accomplishing that.
This shouldn’t be surprising… yet why is largely unaddressed.”
what you say is true: …because of corruption and fulfilling the interests of corporations and lobbyists instead of the people?
That’s exactly what I’m addressing (in part).
And then finally the question… “What is the commons-dedicated account”
(and implicitly… “what does that have to do with any of the rest of this stuff”)
In its formal form its an account that allows a one-button, secure financial contribution in politics or charity in even the smallest amounts, it does it legally and handles the financial reporting. Further it facilitates the networking of those contributions and becomes an attractive utility for both donors and recipients.
Most vitally, it cannot burden the transaction the way other pay systems do… not just to be nice… but because it makes an essential transaction impossible.
You use the word “micro-donation” in your piece! Do you understand what issues are involved in enabling that?
Can you understand that functional political (opinion participation) MUST be as easy and frankly unchallenging as tapping your neighbor (who e.g. happens to be on the school board or something) on the shoulder to let him know what you think.
I’m honestly requesting that if you still don’t understand that you allow me to clarify. All I can say is that I seem to be getting it across to at least a few bright people… though it can take a while… and, of course, I actually hear feedback and questions from them. So I thank you for trying to understand.
I will try to be better with explanation. Believe me, I’m not into things that don’t work or don’t make sense.
It seems so simple… Does this idea help? You can put say $10 into such a dedicated account and dribble it out to causes you believe in a quarter at a time…
Why should that be helpful?
Most people give to charity once in a while… Most NEVER give to a candidate or cause… you ever wonder why?
Did you ever stop to think about how that participation could be expanded? Did you ever wonder what a million people with 50 cents could do on the morning Congress was considering some legislation corporate lobbyists were supporting?
Did you ever try to use PayPal to co-ordinate with others to give that 50 cents (can’t do it)…
Does it matter? You bet it does! And once that P2P capability is there it opens up a lot more.
Here’s the bottom line for me… I’m well-liked and reasonable guy, though admittedly follow my own drummer. I’ll be happy to try and answer any confusions. These are questions that should take only minutes to answer.
But my focus is on moving forward with practical implementation.
Again, try the demo… and if you don’t understand WHY you can’t do that anywhere else or why you might want to… let me know. And while it had occurred to me as a future possibility, I’m pleased that the potential value of such a utility for all transactions… and as a competitor to PayPal has emerged.
However its the non-commercially related transaction ESPECIALLY (as has happened with voice and image) that must be unburdened.
I’m convinced (in my crackpot certainty) that eventually that will be recognized.
hey tom,
re: hidden burdens. ok, so basically what you’re calling a hidden burden is the psychological cost of an arms length transaction?
re: altruism problem. i’m still not understanding the point. what i’m hearing you say is we’re unable to feel empathy towards the plight of every human on the planet because we’d be crippled with sadness. sure. and? i’m still not understanding what the problem is.
re: micropayments. there are already examples of tools for micropayments, like:
– PayPal micropayments (https://micropayments.paypal-labs.com/)
– the now defunct tipjoy (http://techcrunch.com/2009/08/20/tipjoy-heads-to-the-deadpool/)
– sweden-based company flattr (http://flattr.com/about)
– kachingle (http://www.kachingle.com/)
– and of course whatever we’re going to see emerge with Facebook Credits (http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2010/09/facebooks-virtual-currency-takeover-hints-at-micro-payment-battle/)
re: demo. have a link?
and finally, are you associated with robert steele? i recall him talking about needing to create better mechanisms for open governance and citizenship and campaign finance, maybe he can help you promote what you’re working on – http://www.phibetaiota.net/
I’m familiar with both TipJoy and PayPal…
Tipjoy had no payment system and follow-up on assumed pledges was a disaster for recipients.
PayPal cannot legally deal with campaign finance laws under that structure… nor are they suited to the needed VERY small transaction… nor do the serve to establish a useful network with any synergistic capabilities… nor is it owned by the users… totally different concept… totally different goals… which (I contend) would not only produce very different results (even if they DID get the political capability) but would result in the complete LOSS of other capabilities which are “emergent by design’ within this model.
Re Facebook credits… again same legal problem regarding any political transaction (covered now by this patent) as well as its dependence on adding to transaction costs…
And PLEASE… don’t you understand! That works for games but CAN”T WORK FOR POLITICS! as well as other eventual P2P capabilities…
And NONE of them can touch a political mico-payment without addressing the legally required reporting issue… let alone transaction costs… (both issues in the patent)
please re-read that sentence if that’s not clear… THEY CAN’T DO IT!
Further, I’m fine with open source and no fees added to the transaction is a central principal. I also agree with such a network being being non-exclusionary… (from Devin comment above)…
In fact a network of such networks is preferable for the sake of resilience…
(this ties into its potentials in empowering an Internet resilience independent of corporate of government control as well as a potential role in Internet privacy and the ownership of personal data but that’s another essay)
HOWEVER… since neutrality of such a network is essential…
(For a little on why see:
Political Fundraising: Act Blue, Facebook and the Missing Network Imperative
http://culturalengineer.blogspot.com/2010/08/political-fundraising-act-blue-facebook.html )
which briefly points out why its imperative for such a network to be a neutral vehicle… and why such a network or networks must incorporate standards ensuring that…
Its for that reason I believe having proprietary protection is very important so disagree on that point. Though on ownership I believe a form of universal ownership and governance is imperative. And while the campaign issue is different in different countries… the model provides a global solution even where those laws may be different.
And while it may not be politically correct… I’ve lost my home, my savings and been through bankruptcy trying to get this far so have a bit of trouble with those who feel creative entrepreneurship deserves no protection…. that someone can just take all someone else’s work, sing kumbayah and feel noble about it at the same time.
BTW, Whatever facebook or whoever wants to do with micropayments is up to them… but if they get into political contribution they’ll need to be calling me.
Though I’ve been determined to protect it for the Commons at some personal sacrifice as well as to avoid the loss of other social benefits gained if it can be established on its own.
Frankly I’d rather be doing it as an independent system. But if they call I’ll talk since no else is. I’d certainly welcome their assistance. Its been difficult enough out here.
As for the demo link! Sorry, I assumed you had it… I’ve posted it here before. The demo has been up for about 2 1/2 years.
http://www.Chagora.com
Was ready to launch and seek associates in Fall of ’08 but lost HELOC… and so far, frankly… not many have even taken a look.
Don’t feel bad… that includes some important meta-political organizations that in my opinion should really know better.
I made my first trip to New York a few years ago to attend the PdF… my message is consistent and simple but I guess confusing.
Facilitating the political micro-transaction and its networking is the catalyst for the creation of a critically needed network AND PLATFORM for human association. That network must be owned by no government or private corporation. That network forms the root of a vitally needed landscape. I stand by that statement.
Finally…
on the altruism problem… No, you don’t quite have it… It’s not your fault… Its a tricky one to get… because its effects can be very, very subtle. I’ll have to try and find a way to make it clearer. I don’t expect you to take my word for it but I’m very certain its a real biggie. And I certainly don’t believe its impossible to have empathy for everyone on the planet… and even make great sacrifices because of that… And I also believe empathy can and must be expanded and is greatly influenced by culture and education…
The issue is that no matter how much we work on those (and we should)… we’ll be more devastated by the death of our dog than by the death of 100,000 people very far away… and that has effects on decision. The impossibility of individual neutrality is what drives the necessity for a democratization of opinion input. (which is also why I believe any public finance of elections must go through individuals in a system such as I’m describing.)
Ideally, money would be completely out of politics. But this is not even remotely possible under current and forseeable conditions. However expansion of both the number participating… as well as the frequency of participation can go a long way.
Television COULD have drastically expanded public participation and REDUCED campaign costs. But it didn’t… because it got gamed by TPTB.
I’m very serious about preventing that happening to the Internet. THIS SYSTEM PROVIDES THAT INSURANCE!
RE: “so basically what you’re calling a hidden burden is the psychological cost of an arms length transaction?”
NO… e.g. speaking of the ‘voice’ transaction… (phones, etc):
The ‘burden’ (until a tech fix) was that it was not practicable for regular p2p communication across great distances…
the ‘hidden’ part is that we thought that that was a natural part of life… to not be able to transact easily with everybody in our world…
but actually that’s a problem of recent vintage (5 or 10 thousand years)
We’re in the process of re-gaining lost p2p capabilities… but its going to be a bumpy ride.
sorry tom… i feel like i’m asking you to explain what your core message is in a brief and simple way, but each of your responses just gets longer and more difficult for me to understand.
are you trying to say there needs to be a p2p network controlled by its users and not governments or corporations, and that transactions should be able to be made via this network with no transaction fee?
i’m really at a loss.
perhaps if you could clearly state your main message in 1-3 sentences, i would have a better grasp.
thanks.
– v
Well you’re a very good synopsist!
While originally conceived for politics
The same mechanism is viable for ALL transactions…
and undercut PayPal and all similar while offering capabilities they cannot.
But there are very important issues involved with how such a system is implemented.
Those arise out of theory and all that confusing gobbledeegook but I’ll leave that out right now.
Your synopsis is correct…
“there needs to be a p2p network controlled by its users and not governments or corporations, and that transactions should be able to be made via this network with no transaction fee?”
All I’d add is:
1.Mechanism is built
2.Model is a viable implementation.
3.Its Ownership and Governance are integral parts of the “Invention” itself
so what are you waiting for?
😉
Godot…
Is he there?
Interesting stuff Venessa,
Your comments about the drag from all these fees present some interesting questions about the relative value of the various pieces of the puzzle and how this balance shifts over time. It may be reasonable that Kickstarter take 5%…at least for some period of time. They did create an innovative model and did enable a new source of funding for entrepreneurial products. However, as we move forward that 5% cut starts to look less and less reasonable – their model isn’t based on any technology that can’t be replicated by competitors like those you note. I suspect we will see declining “commissions” become an accepted part of the business model for enabling platforms like this.
1. Yay Venessa!!! I’d say that affiliate crowd-funding is going to happen sooner or later.. When I first dove into internet marketing and social media over 4 years ago, I did it for work. But what had also been on my mind was a platform that could help the “starving artist” get off the ground; beyond my actual task at hand, the first thing I thought was “Why can’t fans who really love a certain piece of creative work get a kick back for supporting it”. It all ready happens in life; like wearing a t-shirt at a show and the band simply recognizing it with “hey thanks!”. Its minor, but reciprocal at the same time. Or when street-teamers get back stage passes..?
Whether it’s facebook or wordpress, a digital “page” is in everyone’s future. We’re going to dress it up.. Having a “badge” or simply posting a pic of you at a band’s show that clicks through to the band’s, artist’s, or project’s, etc’s.. page that could be tracked if one “opted in” and earns you a quarter if the project gets paid by the visitor only seems natural.. If you’re a supportive dude, you get paid. Just like in life.
2. Tom is right on!!
“…that the fundamental challenge for a collective decision-making process facing for ANY social organism attempting to scale beyond hunter-gatherer limits on size is finding a way to accomplish “THE CLEAR ALIGNMENT OF SELF-INTEREST, RESPONSIBILITY AND THE GROUP” (the target of biological altruism)”
The truth as I see it, is that only a few of us will actually be able to hit this target. How many species of life have lived on this earth? How many are still around? Some might disagree, but I’d say that humanity is at the pinnacle of this evolution. Now I see human consciousness itself evolving into many “forms” and “ways” of thought; some are significantly more powerful than others, all will not pass go (many that have been are out of practice).. It’s just the way it’s always been and always will be.. I’m not going to preach, but the universe has a very tough love about it.. and like Jesus told us.. “thy kingdom come, thy will be done, on earth as it is in heaven”..
A friend of mine made a support bands, earn money social game. It didn’t really work out – music is a tough space – but now they do music analytics and got another round of funding so we’ll see.
Very cool! What was it called? I’d like to check it out.. I don’t think we’re looking a specific destination site or game.. but something that will be totally immersed into the social graph… an protocol if you will.. sorta like RSS.. or a semantically powered database that traces meta-data attached to social media.. something that will enable social capital. like money, the more it’s used and depended on the more valuable it can become (i realize it’s more dynamic than than, but you know what I think you can catch my drift).. I see it starting though in a network like facebook (and the mass adoption of “likes” and their “social plugins”.. I don’t think facebook is going to get it right though.. But, someone will.. Lets just pray it doesn’t fall into the wrong hands (Big banks.. eck!!).. or get forced on us (Obama admin’s “internet id” – so far being stated as “opt-in”.. but that dude is sneaky)
Ok.. I’m rambling.. gotta run.
it was called: the next big sound
Thanks for opening test account… now you should be able to try some small ‘demo’ contributions… notice one-click contribution w/ email confirmation… btw, can be via a button anywhere on the net… not just via this or some website. Notice potential for realtime feedback… and live capabilities… note how on your account page charity and politics are separated (for legal accounting and tax reasons)… notice one-time fill-out of info for reporting required for political contribution (but not charitable)…
System can add donor and recipient accounts easily… both donor and recipient account pages are ready…. (in terms of database its ready for millions of donors and recipients… obviously presentation and lots and lots of tweaking have barely begun… also clearly needed work on Terms of Service, legal issues, governance and ownership structure. Can’t do more by myself. Though its core functions, very importantly are well protected. You might also want to read the FAQ.
Again, I don’t think I have the answer to all the world’s problems… but I’ve got some practical concepts that could use some exposure… and even if its only for laughs… I just might have some ideas about the future of both money and facebook… like that crazy idea of mine that money is more properly seen as a ‘decision technology’ than as a ‘store of value’…
Decision Technologies: Currencies and the Social Contract
http://culturalengineer.blogspot.com/2010/07/decision-technologies-currencies-and.html
just a work in progress… even sounds a little crazy to me…
Pingback: Storytelling Business Social Media Marketing PR & Technology Curated Stories March 29, 2011
V,
Here’s are ideas toward similar ends (from a March 16, 2010 EBD comment)…
…trustnets can create revenue through systems to pool resources based on recommendations from the group’s most trusted people in fields of shared interest.
For example –
– pooled attention to suggested reading related to the tribe’s commons
– coordinated gifts of time/funds (Pledgebank or ChipIn) to activities that advance shared aims, and
– group purchases of goods or services (e.g. Groupon)
These would help convert the latent action potential of the tribe into resources that can help sustain and advance its aim. Funds could come through:
– context-sensitive advertising or donations by aligned vendors
– partnerships with alternative currency or affinity points providers (eg Paypal/Visa/Mastercard partnerships with nonprofit causes) and
– price savings via coordinated purchases of books, network-friendly mobile apps and phones, and perhaps some option to coordinate big-ticket purchases as well with socially-oriented ventures that earned the tribe’s loyalty through tangible support…
* * *
I feel overwhelmed — as perhaps many others in the EBD community do as well — in trying to cope with the torrent of information and opportunities in fields I care about. It would be a relief to have a means of designating individuals who have earned trust some level of delegation for my giving/purchasing decisions. This would free my time, add to their influence, and likely result in many higher quality decisions.
A web-based tool that helped people pool resources in this way would be another way for trusted blogs to generate new revenues for their sustainability.
What do you think?
Best,
Mark
@openworld
hi mark,
those all sound like good ideas. curation as the next business model.
Just to give a tease on this “decision technology” concept… and what I mean by that… (I may have to resolve myself to spreading confusion for a time)…
Two other decision technologies besides money are:
1. Any kind of torture technique or device
2. Advertising both in its physical technology of delivery as well as the design of its content… (ever wonder why all the men are wimps in Progressive Auto Insurance ads but real “manly men” in luxury car commercials? That’s design! Unfortunate design in my opinion but that also is another essay.)
And no that doesn’t mean that money is torture nor is advertising (okay, insert joke here).
But they share some unique characteristics.
1. All three tap into fundamental ‘lizard brain’ drives… and have real, measurable and immediate neurobiological effects
2. they are all ‘social’ technologies… ( on a desert island by yourself a hammer is still useful for its designed purpose… money, torture devices and ads aren’t; they are only usable with others.)
3. They are ALL very imperfect and problematic substitutes for what were originally a part of P2P transactions within small groups and not reliant on technology for their exercise.
4. And most importantly… they are expressly designed and intended to drive decision from one to another… (decision = an idea + an action)
As technologies they have inherent pathologies… some of them legacies of their origins, some of them magnified by other technologies that have arisen in the meantime as well as scale generally. Its easy enough to recognize the problems in torture but they’re there in the other techs as well. And each is idiosyncratic in its pathologies…
Further the pathologies in money especially have been accentuated because of the inherently complex/chaotic nature of the financial system. And the speed and scale which has accompanied recent ‘financial innovations’ expressly DESIGNED to confuse…
I’m simply trying to take a fresh look at some issues. I’m very reality based but in searching for new paradigms… which are necessary… it just might be worth at least trying a look at some fundamentals. Frankly I feel the line of thought produces some good ideas… well beyond this particular financial innovation I’m pushing.
Like the need to re-introduce at least a bit of sortition in all kinds of governance. (google it)
Thank you for asking a few questions. I’ve encountered little interest from the whole meta-political, ‘new economics’ crowd. So you should be commended for being willing to engage with the crackpot wing… even momentarily.
I’ll continue laying out these ideas slowly via my blog for the time being. I believe they will eventually be recognized as having some value… but that will take a while since while broad strokes can be in brief, sustained argument especially when exploring foundations in search of new paradigms cannot be short-changed.
But whether the ideas are understood or not… the demo seems extremely simple in concept and I’m astounded by the general lack of curiosity.
I hope you will test the demo and pass on any questions, concerns or glitches you find.
I’m convinced that it forms the heart of a needed institution… one that neither political party, nor banks, nor corporate lobbyists are dying to see come to fruition…
Which is why I’d hoped for some attention from the meta-political.. or even the meta-currency crowd who are most concerned with the issue.
The Commons has placed itself in the position of being a beggar at the table. WHY?
I’m not religious in any formal sense… but I’ve always felt that when Jesus said “the meek shall inherit the earth”…
He wasn’t saying some big dude’s gonna come down to earth and give you a big present… and its party time ever after…
To inherit also means to ‘take up responsibility for’…
I build tools… but I can’t make people pick-em up… or even look at ’em.
It would be remiss of me to fail to add that, aside from ‘theories’, I believe its inevitable that the capabilities which, in basic form I’ve made ready now for a few years (and, in fact… if a PayPal or similar had wanted to could have done so a long time ago) will be recognized.
Several months ago you wrote a post about how you felt a bit condescended to by those bankers at that conference you attended.
I know the feeling.
It exists in other worlds besides banking…
Tom, where do you get the contact, profile and transaction information for the recipient of the funds raised through Chagora?
Potential recipients in politics (causes or candidates) would need to be legally registered with IRS and subject to campaign reporting requirements.
As a matter of principal there should be no other requirements… but legal aspects must be fulfilled…
Same for charities…(though reporting issues don’t arise in that case and donor anonymity is possible in those cases.
Ultimately, if as now seems possible… individual recipients and commercial transactions should also be possible thru the same account system… then this moves from being a dedicated system (like Facebook credits and the rest which CANNOT function in the political area ) to being a very viable competitor to PayPal. Individual to Individual would have requirements no different than such transactions now have… as would commercial…
I’d suggest that non-commercial News/Journalism potentials follow the individual to individual model with little to no requirements other than transparency.
As noted in other places (i have stuff written all over the web…) the political especially is dependent on a simple one-button capability… to do this securely is possible utilizing a system originally proposes by author David Brin (The Transparent Society) whereby that ‘button-push’ constitutes a pledge rather than a call for immediate movement of money… with follow-up confirmation by email which need not take place immediately and may aggregate multiple pledges to transactions of various types.
On a general note I’d add that too many systems are trying to make it easier for the recipients… that’s a great idea… nothing at all wrong with it… I believe this will do that too…
But the real key is to create a system for the USER… THAT’S the network which must be catalyzed…
If the Commons wants to stop being a beggar its going to need to have its own power.
And that’s why it needs protection (proprietary or otherwise)…
This network… could very well be another big money-maker for financial services sector if they can lock it up! They can also shape (and limit) its capabilities…
I don’t think that would be a very good idea… in fact this may be the last chance (the Web is an evolutionary shift… HOW it evolves will shape our future evolution and whether we can escape some perilous rocks ahead).
Frankly, I’m glad that Facebook and PayPal, etc. didn’t think of it.
Do you really want such a platform corporate owned? Should each party have its own dedicated systems for only its candidates and causes? Do I need to explain why such a vehicle must be neutral? Why it must facilitate co-ordination and be available for interest groups of all kinds that want to solicit donors…
(Yes… that means even idiots we are absolutely are positive don’t know what they’re talking about).
IF such a network can be catalyzed… And I believe it can and will… the only question is the shape of its development and how long it takes. But those are critical questions. Determinative questions in my opinion… a very big civilization decision… too big to be left to TPTB… but like what happened with television.., people talk… write papers, hold seminars… and TV turned into the greatest spur to the control of politics by money instead of the opposite.
So I didn’t wait. I’m convinced certain issues with the political transaction (the potentials in the networked micro-transaction as well as paradoxically fortuitous legal requirements) provide a vital key to a last chance for the people to take hold of… stuff. (shhhh… ultimately it has a lot to do with banking in general as well as credit creation… but that’s an anticipated later ’emergent potential in my opinion which can’t develop w/o a link to the pathological but still ubiquitous existing system).
I’d also add that such an independent network… NOT centrally controlled but adhering to certain agreed upon Enlightenment principals… THEN becomes the proper ‘distributed institution’… with the unchallengeable power to build that resilient Internet Mr. Rushkoff has discussed as well as being possibly the needed repository for certain individual information under the control of only that individual or his/her designees
In all these cases there will always be a threat of mis-use (as there is now with phony charities, etc.) and that has been given thought… but don’t want this answer to be too long.
Just a simple idea. But with some deep thought behind it.
Creating a database with an open API and transaction functionality for political candidates is a massive challenge that has yet to be overcome. Until such a database exists, the mass microfunding of political campaigns can’t that place. Are you pursuing the creation of such a database?
Please try demo… http://www.Chagora.com
Will be happy to discuss questions but probably best to do that first. My understanding is that this database is ready for any number of donors and recipients… but I’m not a programmer…
Issue is solved by enabling the donor first… not the campaign… once donor enabled…
then ALL campaigns are enabled.
That’s why vehicle must be neutral…
But please give feedback or questions. Maybe I’m missing something obvious.
However they did seem to get the concept at the patent office!
Feel free to call if you want (early morning West Coast best) 818 363-0775
I like Beex concept! Very clever and inspires creativity in participants! Would love to chat…
Email me your skype name and I’ll call you.
devin[at]beex.org
Great… I sent email and will see what’s up with my skype this afternoon!
also if needed… mine is
CulturalEngineer [at] gmail.com
Thanks for interesting article and thoughts. When I read your last line in particular:
“Perhaps it would create a category of advertising that directs people’s attention (and microdonations!) in a socially useful way, verse just encouraging people to consume more stuff.”
I couldn’t help but want to share about LoudSauce, which is a crowdfunded media buying platform. It essentially left’s users chip in to push ads they believe in (for non-profits and social businesses) out through traditional advertising channels (like TV, billboards, and more.)
It’s different from what you’re proposing, but seems relevant and shares a similar ambition around transforming advertising from driving consumption to fueling civic participation.
hey colin, that is an awesome idea! i’m going to think about how i can use loudsauce
Hi there,
I just saw the article in Forbes and thought I would make a comment here. We’ve been involved in the funding space for 20 years mostly in film, music and publishing. We saw the need a couple of years ago for the affiliates to be integrated into the funding of projects so we built out a platform that we just launched called SoKap.
Our site believes that enterprise is a 3 legged stool and that crowdfunding should not be about merely donations, but more of an ebb and flow of commerce and enterprise that allows creatives and influencers to benefit from being involved in the project.
Not only do we have an affiliate program built into SoKap but we also have the first micro licensing program that allows individuals to fund a project in return for a portion of the future revenue that is tied to bite sized geographical area like a city, or a state rather than having to buy the entire country’s rights in order to fund the project.
to demo our affiliate program to you here is a sample link to a project on our site where the person who puts the link out to friends and family would earn 5% of the revenue that is generated from the raise, but like other crowdfunding sites….ONLY if the project reaches its goal within the time allotted.
http://sokap.com/r/66790660
The band in this case sets the affiliate fee and can use this option or opt to not use it all.
I urge you all to check out the site and provide me with feedback. Please keep in mind that we are new and that the official launch with a much cleaner site, UI/UX and other functions will be released in the coming weeks.
Thanks for writing this story as we know its been a needed function of fundraising and the people who make up the fundraising community.
In hopes this will add clarification on the mechanics at least:
TRY THE DEMO! IT DOESN’T BITE!
http://www.Chagora.com
This in no longer just a “commons-dedicated account” concept but full Internet wallet… better than any out there… and I believe of importance.
I’m giving it to the commons once I can avoid personal starvation and homelessness and assuming the Commons has enough sense to pay attention.
Patent #7,870,067 just granted by USPTO 01/11/’11
The technical approach:
I call it a Pooled-User-Determined Account.
Keeping it simple… in very practical terms.
What I am describing is a model for a Commons-Owned, Self-supporting Internet Wallet that doesn’t add to transaction costs, allows a viable micro-transaction (especially useful in politics), the networking of transaction and the protection of user information.
All under some form of User/Commons/Universal ownership and governance…
With an independent VIABILITY on its own… that makes sure that the Commons is NO LONGER A BEGGAR AT THE TABLE.
I believe there are a number of very important additional emergent properties but let’s start with the basics.
OKAY!
A simple and obvious requirement is that it must be a financially equivalent transaction for the donor and recipient whether the contribution is via this system (let’s call it Chagora for now at least) or if you, e.g. went directly to the recipient’s website…
(an example):
Donor wants to give $20 to Red Cross…
User can got to Red Cross website, whip out his Visa and give $20… Red Cross pays transaction fee to Visa and Red Cross gets, I don’t know … $19.50 or something… doesn’t matter.
or
User goes to Chagora… puts in $20… Chagora pays Visa transaction fee… Chagora transfers $20 to Red Cross and recoups the fee for a $20 Visa charge from Red Cross. Equivalence…
Of course, then the obvious question is… okay… big deal…but two things… so what’s the advantage of using such a system if I can just go to the guy’s website myself… and aren’t there going to be some costs incurred by Chagora that have to be covered somehow?
Yes! Of Course…
The advantages have to do with the additional capabilities which I’ll describe in brief… and the monetization arises via some variations on traditional advertising (with emphasis on local)… before you get your nether hairs all in a knot… remember this is under a form of universal ownership so essentially it can act as a tax by the Commons on entities which are attempting to address it… there are also monetization potentials in certain campaign or charity services which may actually drastically reduce what equivalent charges would be in the private sector… but basic services in those areas are envisioned as being freely offered at no charge to legal candidates or causes. P.S. This is a low-cost business when the profiteering is removed… its almost an automated process.
Okay… now to the One-button transaction… especially the one-button Political Contributions… and MOST especially the viable MICRO-transaction whether in politics or for other purposes:
The Pooled-User-Determined-Account
In essence money and Information go on separate tracks when you make a deposit in your account. When a User deposits money in his/her account certain rights are lost and certain rights are retained.
For example… let’s take that $20… When you put that $20 into the account you can’t take it back out… You no longer ‘own’ it… but (and this is the critical element) you retain CONTROL over its distribution… down to the penny… (some kinds of trusts work like this… but this is for everybody).
Now you can immediately give out that $20 to Red Cross or whatever in which case Chagora simply acts as a sort of pass-through…
Or you may keep some amount in your account for future purposes (like people do with those inevitable hanging x-box points)… and give it out in all sorts of increments to all sorts of recipients.
How about the micro-transaction?
Okay, so you’ve got $2.75 left in your account after whatever other stuff you’ve been doing (or $100, or 25 cents… it doesn’t matter)
And you get an email to “Join the rest of us here at Greenpeace (or whatever) click here and give 25 cents to repair our ship damaged by whatever…
So you click the button and give 25 cents… how would that work? And be secure?
Button links to your account… a 25 cent PLEDGE (NOT an immediate transfer) is recorded to Greenpeace…
You, either immediately or on a pre-determined (by user) periodic basis receive an request for email, IM, or similar confirmation for that pledge alone or a list of pledges to confirm or deny individually.
Okay, now what happens to that 25 cents and those transaction charges (remember it came out of an original $20 deposit whose transaction charges were paid by Chagora) …
Back to explaining the P.U.D. account… when you deposit into Chagora your money goes into one or more POOLS… but your information and decisions regarding its distribution remain with YOU!
So when you designate that 25 cents to Greenpeace… (to make the example clear) it’s combined with other pledges to Greenpeace to reach $20… Greenpeace pays the charge on a transfer equivalent to $20…
Its a little more complicated in actuality but that’s what is essentially accomplished.
ON PERSONAL INFORMATION:
When signing up for Chagora, obviously at least enough information is required to complete the deposit should it be via Visa, MC or whatever… HOWEVER from there on, its up to the User…
Obviously for political contribution certain information is demanded and if donor anticipates participation that must be provided… but that need not be utilized elsewhere and is under the control of the User. Similarly a charity contribution could be anonymous or not (user choice).
I’d suggest that ultimately this network provides a possible home for certain information which can remain under the control of the User alone.
And further, that an account has functionality even when un-funded and accounts can be opened with no money at all for other purposes.
I sometimes skip around and assume things are clear to people when they aren’t… so Please ask questions and try demo to guide questions… or please point out faults and/or concerns (there are many potential concerns)…
Maybe this is a helpful way to look at it!
When we give (or are taxed) money to government it goes into a big pool and they do stuff with it. Presumably we have influence over that, but leaving that shaky proposition aside…
This is like putting money into the pool… but YOU decide what to do with it… together with others.
All in all a somewhat scary proposition but we’d best get on with it.
I’m rather desperately seeking some notice here… some questions… comments… criticisms… critiques…etc… this has cost me everything and the hearing for eviction is a week from Monday… no shit.
AN ADMISSION: I have ulterior motives… I want to (quite legally and pragmatically) weaken or destroy the TBTF banks and crack open the political system and break the dominance of the duopoly.
And create the foundations for a more people oriented financial system… I believe this is a seed.
Hi Vanessa,
thanks for citing http://www.Kapipal.com 🙂
Interesting scenario, especially combined with social networks and mobile. Of course, crowdfunding platforms would need better micropayment tools (lower fees, less barriers to entry, international support)
Best,
Alberto
@kapipal
I like your idea because it takes it to another level. I do have a question. If its a project you believe in, why do you have to profit from it to promote it.
What about we create a platform that allows each individual to pick a set of project they believe in and that is pass along to their friends.
The very concept of open source is to share your knowledge.
sure, you could simply promote the work of people you believe in. the idea was, is there a way to engage in ‘ethical advertising’ of sorts… where you could make a small affiliate fee while also supporting people/projects within your network.
I totally agree with you about crowdfunding being a potential game changer for sustainability related initiatives. I wrote a post on crowdfunding for sustainability in Northern Arizona a little while back . Also, thanks for the lead on beex.org. I will have to pass that around to others here in NOAZ who are looking to use crowdfunding as a starter for their projects!
Pingback: Could Affiliate Crowdfunding Be an Alternate Model for Online Advertising? « emergent by design : Sharing Links to Crowd Funding Websites, Articles and Videos
What’s up, the whole thing is going sound here and ofcourse every one is sharing data, that’s genuinely excellent, keep up writing.