History of community-funded 3d printer is broken

valnet / valuenetwork

Resource Planning and Value Accounting for Value Networks

http://mikorizal.org

GNU Affero General Public License v3.0

99 stars 25 forks source link

History of community-funded 3d printer is broken #508

Closed bhaugen closed 8 years ago

bhaugen commented 8 years ago

Probably by the recent exchange improvements. http://nrp.sensorica.co/accounting/resource/411/

"Where from" used to show all the contributors.

They are gone from the incoming value flows, too: http://nrp.sensorica.co/accounting/incoming-value-flows/411/

Here's the exchange: http://nrp.sensorica.co/accounting/exchange/0/466/ but the contributors never did show up there.

You can see the contributors here: http://nrp.sensorica.co/accounting/resource/397/

bhaugen commented 8 years ago

Fixed, I think.

bhaugen commented 8 years ago

P.S. it was mostly bad data that might come from some bugs that should be investigated, that I will check out soon:

Payments to ORD that had both give and receive events, where the receive events were marked as contributions (to ORD?). The receive events probably should not exist, ORD is outside the network. And they definitely should not be marked as contributions. I changed the receive events so they were no longer marked as contributions.
A transportation expense event where the resource type was "Transport" (a service) and the resource was the 3d printer. Sorry, that combination does not compute. And there was already a receive event for the printer. So I knocked the resource off the event.

If any Sensoricans think those changes are wrong in some way ( @TiberiusB ?) please let me know, but I am pretty confident that they are correct.

P.P.S. I don't like to do this (change Sensorica data without explicit permission), but was trying to get something together for this thread where Sensorica might get some help with their accounting problems, and I have really limited time these days.

TiberiusB commented 8 years ago

Hi @bhaugen

No problem for taking initiative, especially when time is short.

I don't understand this:

The receive events probably should not exist, ORD is outside the network. And they definitely should not be marked as contributions.

We can think about is along property regimes. The ORD printer is currently in a shared property regime, meaning a few individuals own it. The agreement says that when the printer will be paid, it will change property regime, it will become part of what we call "pool of shareables".

The rules of use are related to the property regime. But in both cases the printer is a shared resource for sensoricans. In that sense, it is not outside of the network, it should be listed in the inventory and should be an option for "usables".

Does that makes it more clear?

I don't understand your second point... need more info. Perhaps some links to NRP will help.

NOT URGENT!

bhaugen commented 8 years ago

I don't understand this:

The receive events probably should not exist, ORD is outside the network. And they definitely should not be marked as contributions.

I mean ORD the company is outside the network, and marking an economic event as a contribution to that company does not make sense. And that had happened to a couple of events. So I unmarked them. I can find them again if you are really interested in the gory details, but that was a problem in showing the data clearly. I'm not sure whether this was a data entry mistake or a bug, but will check into it soon.

The other one was I think a mistake, but the result was receiving the 3d printer twice, which I don't think actually happened.

fosterlynn commented 8 years ago

Payments to ORD that had both give and receive events

This is a problem of the data conversion done when we implemented exchange types.

bhaugen commented 8 years ago

So you don't think it is an ongoing bug?

fosterlynn commented 8 years ago

I just tested it and it looks fine, not an ongoing bug.