s-ben
commented
5 years ago The problem boils down to matching people willing to pay with people willing to work.
I think there are some fundamental questions that need to be answered first.
- Who are the "people willing to pay"? If it's a P2P kind of thing (DCR holder A (or DCR holders A, B and F) really want this, and are looking for a contributor B to do the work), then it starts looking more like a bounty or crowdsourcing model. Gitcoin is executing the bounty model really well. Best practices and UI could be borrowed. Or we could just use Gitcoin as part of the solution (in fact part of their value prop is that it's a good recruitment tool). If it's the "community as a whole" that's looking to pay, we need some way for the community to signal funding priorities. Politeia seems to be working great for large proposals. But most tasks current and potential contractors are looking to take on (and be paid for) are smaller, including most tasks in this repo. This looks more like the crowdfunding model, where contributors go around the community raising funds. This seems promising from a signaling point of view, but presumably we haven't seen this at scale in the wild for a reason. Like Politeia, doing a Kickstarter for each little task you do is too much work for all parties involved. Tipping bots are kind of somewhere in the middle. They seem to be effective at increasing community engagement, but I'm not sure they'd provide the level of decision-making bandwidth we need here.
- How do we categorize people? Right now, we have contractors and non-contractors. And contractors first come on (afaik) as part-time contractors, who maybe have a different status and less visibility into the system (I believe that's where I am, though am not sure actually). Is this system open to anyone, or just contractors? If this is only for contractors, is it for part-time as well as full-time? Do they need a DCC? What are the barriers to entry?
- Who evaluates work output?
- Is there a potential bottleneck? Do a group of people need to manually review ideas/finished work product for DCR to be paid? Potentially creating unwanted management work (not a lot of wannabe managers around here)? Or does that group of people need to manually intervene or veto to block funds that a system automatically sends out?
xaur
This community issue tracker serves to coordinate people's activity.
Finding what you can get paid for is even more interesting than what you can just do. It is reasonable to try and evolve issue tracker into a platform where you can find paid work.
Actionable tasks with defined scope, discoverability via search/tags/linking, assignability to workers, decomposition via subtasks - are standard features of issue trackers that perhaps can be extended to coordinate funding.
The problem boils down to matching people willing to pay with people willing to work. The end goal is to get more great stuff built sooner.
What we look for looks like some combination of crowdfunding and crowdsourcing.
Search the space, there must be existing workflows, software and platforms we can learn from or even use directly.
TODO: formulate task, write simple description of what this system does, find a name for it.
Heavily overlaps with #33.
Things to look at:
Discussions: