Topic: [DVC]DevCoin - Official Thread - Moderated - page 364. (Read 1058949 times)

STOP!

Every time the bigger-picture issue of devtome vs all else comes up it moves onto the question of relative intra-devtome payments. This is an issue but it is not the same issue (how devtome shares are divvied up can be resolved whatever the starting sum or % is).
---------

Ok this is selfish but I'd really appreciate, and I think devcoin would benefit from, at least a few more posts of some other people's views aside those so far on that greater question of devcoin and devtome's worth within it - in the context of everything else required and potential - i.e. in relative terms. If most others think the status quo is fine then I can shut up and move on, otherwise share your view.

Unthinkingbit - is the current setup here to stay or do you have other ideas/suggestions?

Edit: sidhujag, didn't see your message before I posted that - nice one.

1 million from me too to whoever fixes it.

Sorry, I was too pithy/brief. The strategy should be more complex than that:
repeat (better writings >> more money) until loads of money >> more writers >> merit payment ... etc
Until then, writing by passion should do it...
Anyway, I thought it's not here the place (DevTome thread?) and the time (let's first put out the fire...) to debate the payment system.

How many coders could aggregate under some (unknown for now) project leader, and where is a ro(o)ster?
(a joke, in my culture the rooster is the leader... a vocal one)

this is very much a big part of the problem, i think. but can anyone envision a system -- a FAIR system -- that rewards better writers? i see that payouts differ based on page views/ad revenue already, but that does not do anything about the quality of writing. either writing standards should be raised (unlikely to work in practice), or the base level reward should be lowered, with opportunity for writers of high quality work to receive higher than base-level rewards.

the latter is ideal, but the problem is, how do we go about this fairly? in many organizations, this type of incentive system that we are talking about is very much at risk of falling to favoritism/nepotism. how do we keep it from becoming a system where top admins reward themselves and their friends, while leaving high quality -- possibly better -- writers in the dust?

This couldn't be more wrong. If it were right, jobs wouldn't pay better workers more money. They would pay less.

The lower the payments become, the more lower-quality workers stay and the more higher-quality workers will leave.

Really, there should be a way to determine quality of writers. There are many sites that hire freelancers that base their pay on your own skills (in that the higher-quality writers will always earn more, even for the same amount of work, because they have more knowledge of writing and are much more well-spoken).

The big issue with writer payments I've seen is that everyone is paid the same. It doesn't matter how good or bad your writing is, whether it's a well-researched article or not, etc. Putting people on that same level just leads to issues. If one person spends 3 hours researching their article before writing it, and another spends 20 minutes total on theirs, and they get paid the same, there is no real incentive for the former; they are essentially working more for less.

The last I read on the issue was a reference to the developer who worked on the updates to (I think) i0coin perhaps doing the same for devcoin. The problem was - to keep going full circle - the lack of available incentive to get it done. However, although I'm not able to appraise the required effort/knowledge needed I will contribute 1 million dvc (escrow is fine) if anybody is able to contact them and make it happen - because it doesn't look like the power of positive thought will be enough...

Maybe some "helicopter view" could help?

There are a few issues (listed in their importance order):
A - [Forever] term: create a real economy in devcoins, with it's own eco-system
(I'm preparing to sell some services for devcoins - services, so I could keep the coins and not sell them asap...)

B - Short term: How can we stop the fall (mcx...) and, if needed, improve/correct/... code
(my previous post...)

C - Long Term: better writings, more earnings (from those...), and more writers also
(I really think that lowering rewards could weed out ... well ... undesirables at least)

As You could see, there is the same dilemma between urgency and importance...

Update the codebase! 

What did the response say?

I think we are on the same page, and I know some others are too including MarkM... its not like your not being heard. I think the top priority right now is keeping it on the exchange and then finding out what to do with bounties/writing payments etc.

Yeah perhaps I could write it in my own blog, then copy that again over to devtome for some extra while hoping mcxnow dvc flow remains adequately liquid before code problems put paid to an exchange option? Yes I know that's an arbitrary cheap shot but it serves to make a point. No I don't blame you for such a dynamic existing, and no I'm not going to write an article about it.

Does not offering any opinion on the relative value of projects imply you think devtome is the most important, or that it just works too well for you to suggest otherwise?

We have a fundamental difference of opinion on all this. Devcoin et al are supposed to be progressively more de-centralised payment systems, not a self congratulatory word bucket for verbose special flowers to pay ourselves. Under that assumption, a deferral to any powers-that-be strikes me as a complete kop out, or just evidence of gaming. Which is fine, but then don't fall back on concerns over devcoin - as such an outlook is part of the problem for those who think otherwise of the potential.

-----------
To be totally clear, I'm not anti-devtome or writers or writing, I just cannot understand the benefit of having a payment mechanism that enables one apparently-initial project to cannablise the potential and opportunities of everything else. But I keep making this point to little agreement or consensus and I'm bored of doing so.

mrca: I happen to think devtome submission should be for nothing - perhaps a notional amount for time spent editing etc aside - and any earnings based on views/advertising. i.e. catalysing self-funding/failure due to no interest, rather than subsidised by everything else.

And for those who may think that as someone who's earnt dvc for writing I'm talking out of my arse - if the system was changed to (for example, devtome as 5-10% max of total) I would be quite happy to contribute towards any feeling-hard-done-by-although-it-makes-no-sense-to-continue-like-this compensation pot, although I believe the price itself would resolve those concerns anyway.

I got a response to my email after I popped in on the chat window and said something along the lines of I hope Devcoin will remain on the exchange because that's the main alt coin I trade, etc.  Not sure if the two events were connected or not.  Just FYI...

I'm a coder and I also write. I find those activities similar (sic!).
(those for my day-job)
I also wash my kids' asses when needed...
(those for my family)
If I write for DevTome, I want my [crypto]money, if promised, but also I would do it for nothing...
Remember the spirit of the Moon Race?

Totally right!
I'm sure we (or most of us) are mature enough to focus on solving problems, as opposite to finding the escape goat (the "corporate" way).

I could also help, but my reputation is null, and usually newcomers have a trust issue to overcome, unbalanced by my skills. In other words, I'm sort of "jack of all trades", from electronics to (some) higher maths, and they (my kind) are considered less specialized. I also discover frequently that lots of "specialists" - at least in my close vicinity - know less, and are able to do lesser...

In less words: HOW CAN I HELP?

Well I did ask him if we work on the code can we come up with a plan to keep it on the exchange? Also stressed the fact that it is a growing coin with more and more vendors and keeping it on the exchange would help it grow a lot easier and faster.

No response yet.

Please do write RealSolid [email protected] and tell him all about how you were about to join but might not now because you heard the sad news that Devcoin is going to be delisted.

I think it's good for RS to get a lot of feedback that DVC will be missed because he may simply not be aware of how important it is to a lot of his customers (or potential customers).

How do you think we should go about promoting this? And why at the end of every round, as opposed to say, in general?

Any more information about this? Pretty new to devcoin -- what are the issues and how is it being worked on? (Or is it being worked on?)

You're going to have to convince the decision makers on that one.  That's all I'm trying to say.  You can write an article about why things should change, how they should change, and why it's ridiculous to keep things the way they are.  Then you should send a link to your article to the decision makers of the Devcoin project.  But you might as well get paid for it in the mean time.

Personally, the biggest issue I see with Devcoins is that there lacks an economy for them.  However, I see that changing as more people are opening up businesses which accept Devcoins in payment.  Some of those businesses have been opened up by Devtome writers.  I'm working on a venture myself.  I guess I don't see the problem.  It seems to be working the way it should be working using the current payout system.  It's just going to take some time.

Having Devcoin kicked off mcxNOW would be annoying, to be sure.  But it's not going to kill Devcoin (I suspect it will have more negative ramifications for mcxNOW than it will for Devcoin).  If there is a genuine problem with the DVC code, then it's a good idea to fix it.  But honestly, RealSolid is the first person I've encountered who ever found that to be an issue.  My wallet and the Devcoins inside it work just fine, and I have a much easier time sending DVCs around than I've lately had sending Bitcoins around from certain addresses.

This is really too bad. I hadn't gotten around to joining the platform, and now it looks like I may not, after all. I have sent an email requesting that this decision be reconsidered. 

I'd just like this concept to work. Honestly I couldn't care less if 'working' meant 99% of shares going to devtome, because that would imply a large enough community of people keen to buy devcoins to support such writings alone. Another concept could then capture interests in other things. However that's not the case.

That writing an article is suggested as a means of demonstrating or justifying a position in itself underscores the ridiculous nature of the payment structure, and perhaps of the mindset of those availing themselves of it (and yes to be clear - to date such persons includes me).

In terms of supporting the fixing of issues...I'd turn the question around. What (in the opinion of others) is the most important issue today with regards to devcoin? What do you think resolution of that issue is 'worth'? Should then any other project accrue a greater payout than that one? The remaing ideas/projects etc could quite easily be tiered from that first principle and dynamically adjusted with new stuff.

It's not about fault/otherwise. It's as simple as changing things that aren't working in the means intended. Unless this is how it was meant to be - in which case it's just my misunderstanding from the onset.

In terms of blame, that's more difficult without making it personal. But broadly I think capping the devtome payout would address the issue of a payment structure that favours certain types of submission, sometimes not of the greatest quality or value - neither to the reader or the writer.

Those of you who code and who would love to fix whatever the coding issue is with Devcoin, but who balk because we fat cat and mercenary writers just hog all the shares, I'd really love to read an article which explains in plain English what the issue was and how it was fixed.  Just sayin'.  Did someone make a rule that coders are not allowed to also write?

And for the record, I would have no problem with it if there were modifications made which limited writer shares further or limited the piece of the pie the Devtome took--especially if those decisions were made in the best interests of the Devcoin project overall.  As I have said before, the client is always right.  Please understand that it's not us who are keeping this from happening.  It would be great if all you coder types would quit implying that it is somehow our fault that you're not getting as many shares as you believe you deserve.  I am just writing according to the terms that were laid out for me.  If they change in the future, as long as it's not in the middle of a round, I will not protest or complain, and I don't think anyone else is either.  Your beef is not with us.

I hope the issue can be fixed so that DVC can remain on mcxNOW, but in the mean time, I'd appreciate it if we writers weren't blamed for the problem, especially considering we did not write the code, nor would most of us be able to fix it even if we wanted to (I'm not a coder).

Believe me, anything I can do to support coders who can fix this issue, I would be willing to do because I really LOVE having DVC on mcxNOW.  But again, I repeat, it's not my decision.