Project Registry (was Ransomware)

[SimPLsol at aol.com]

Dan,
     Between your letter and this reply, Dennis wrote a better answer than I 
could have. Yes, we are talking about something beyond Ransomeware.
     I think you and I are looking at this from two different perspectives - 
which is good. You are looking out for the developer's interests, I am looking 
at this as an investor. From an investor's perspective ransomeware has 
problems:
     1. Any money you put into it is gone. You may or may not get your 
product. You may or may not like the charity to which you have donated. You have no 
chance to reinvest the money in another product - or the same product with a 
different developer.
     2. There is no mechanism (e.g., a moderator) to make the inevitable 
adjustments that occur in any sizable project.
     3. Not only is there no escrow, there is no real money. This makes it 
hard to encourage serious developers.
     4. The ransom model seems to be geared toward helping developers with 
ideas find investors. This is good. But the escrow model equally encourages 
investors to find developers for their ideas.

     The escrow model IS more complicated but the structure benefits everyone 
on both sides of the process - and it scales much better than the ransom 
model, accommodating all but the largest and most complicated projects.
     The end product from the escrow model can be either open source or 
commercial - this must be disclosed at the beginning of any request. Ransomeware 
does not (as I view it) lend itself to commercial products.

     Both methods need a Registry (or some other means of communication 
between investors and developers). I have pledged $100 to start building this 
registry. Since there is no registry until the registry is built, I volunteer to 
keep a list of pledges and will find a trusted third party to hold actual funds 
if we get that far in this experiment.
Paul Looney