Would better quality writing do anything to address the issues you raise or do you see the whole thing as unworkable? ...
I agree with the vibe of what you write. If I didn't I wouldn't bother being here and I wouldn't bother making these points. Instead I'd just take the money and shut the hell up. But I view your basic objectives and philosophy and draw different conclusions.
Perhaps the simplest way to put it, is that any direct resources put towards one idea or work-ideal cannot be put towards another. I have zero issue with writing. I read. I write on devtome, I'm an admin on devtome and spend quite a lot more time on it than I need to - because I think such efforts matter even if only for concept. But I'm also a realist. I read most submissions, I have a fair idea of content and feel I can draw general inferences on motivations.
You're misunderstanding my perspective. I'm not a developer and I'm not guaging writing as less valuable as anything else. Quite the opposite, I'm repeatedly trying to make the point that a project focusing on open-source should treat all creative forms more equally. Administering a revenue element to one or more forms (paid direct or advertising or other) should be a bonus, not a principle, and justified by that form. Because devcoin serves to reward open-source I don't think it's too much to ask that involved participants play a role in building and supporting their relative creation base first, rather than being takers only. If they don't value their work why should I?
It's not an issue of not being workable/not, it already 'works' - just mostly for some over others. Quite similarly to bigshot bitcoin miners winning over everyone else. But bitcoin doesn't stake any claim on equity or reward for work or open-source. In general, I don't think the 'whole thing' justifyies its subsidy - yet perhaps. So it's simply that while I don't rate writing as less important than anything else I also don't rate it as more important. We should always be trying to objectively question whether the process is working as it should.
I won't take offence at anything you say. In response though, I would ask a couple of questions:
1) Does Devcoin paying us such sums to lay our creative souls bare add or subtract from the concept of growing, sustainable open-source (all open source) support?
2) Would resources be better utilised on those who value their work first for creation's sake, or does incentivising rolling input on content terms for monetary reward trump this?
Thank you for not taking offence, and helping me understand your views. I think maybe my own views are very simplistic and what I hope, or wish probably is not an answer to your questions.
Who do I ask the question: WHY does Devcoin/Devtome pay me for my writing? Is it because it is valued on it's own merit, or is it just a mechanism for building the Devcoin community?
If the latter is the case, maybe its just about deciding how big the resource should be and setting a price that's worth to get done and putting up "bounties" or some such for x number of words on certain subjects like any of the other projects Devcoin funds?
)
