Project Registry (was Ransomware)

david bovill david at openpartnership.net
Thu Jul 21 07:59:10 CDT 2005


>
Dan wrote:

> Paul....
>
> I think the problem for me has come as this has escalated from a 
> fairly simple approach to enabling someone who plans to develop and 
> release open source/freeware to gauge the market before doing so, into 
> a sort of commercial-grade bidding registry which, I agree, would 
> require appropriate disposition of the proceeds of any deposits made 
> on behalf of projects that never get off the ground.
>
> Maybe there are two classes of project: free/opensource, and 
> commercial, with slightly different rules and procedures for each?
>
> Dan


They are part of a continuum. The legal and technical framework needs 
to be flexible enough so that projects that start "just for fun" can 
scale to fully commercial projects without anyone feeling "ripped off". 
So yes "slightly different rules and procedures for each" - and these 
should be negotiated on a project by project basis - the approach we 
take is to issue a secure digital currency based on a legal contract 
("Ricardian contract") which is a flexible enough legal instrument to 
encompass most forms of collaborative work.

One such currency which we have been working on we call "shards" - 
these are like shares but with a different legal basis - in simple 
terms they represent a "proportional share in revenue" (not profit). 
They can be issued in return for cash investment or development (in 
kind investment), or project management etc.

A currency like this can be issued for each project with the ability to 
customise the contract associated with the currency or just accept a 
standard (tested) contract. The hard part has been to get all this 
legally robust.

If this sounds not applicable to not-for-profit ventures... then this 
is simply a question of language. If there is not revenue from a 
project - and the investors / stake holders choose to pursue such a 
path, then the shards have no commercial value - perhaps they acts as 
"votes". If there ever is any commercial value in the future - then 
everyone knows where they stand and this is legally binding in court.


On 20 Jul 2005, at 19:58, SimPLsol at aol.com wrote:
>
> Work requested: Build a Project Request Registry
>
> Description: This will be a web site with functionality similar to the
> current Feature Enhancement section of STSRevzilla. It will allow 
> users to post
> requests, investors to make pledges, and developers to bid on the 
> projects. It
> will also let developers post proposals and request financing. There 
> will be a
> summary page of all requests and a detail page for each request. The 
> format of
> the detail page will be similar to the one used for this request. 
> There will
> also be detail pages for each bid/quote.

I like this - I would propose building into this two simple ideas from 
Scum / Agile Development - "Product Backcatalog" and "Sprint 
Backlog"... this would allow features to be requested, ranked and time 
/ costs allocated + project progress tracked.

>
> Moderator for this request: Dan?/Paul?/???
>
> Voting basis: One vote per dollar invested

Votes and how they are related to project management and investment is 
a complicated issue. I would not however go with this proposed basis - 
there are other stakeholders other than just cash investors.

>
> Distribution of completed project: Given to Revolution Ltd. if they 
> agree to
> host it. Given to any other host if Rev. declines the gift. This work 
> is not
> intended to be sold, no profits are anticipated.

I'd propose that the project be open sourced - LGPL or whatever (not 
GPL)... unless a significant investor wished the project to be sold as 
a closed source component.

>
> Maintenance: Developer's proposal should contain reserves for bug fixes
> during the first three months this is deployed. Improvements or later 
> bug fixes
> will be handled by a separate requests.
>
> Limit on number of investors: None

Can be. Project management?

>
> Currency used: US Dollars
>
> Minimum contribution per investor: $10
>
> Maximum contribution per investor: $10,000

OK by me  - but not really needed.

>
> Pledges to date:
> Paul Looney, SimPLsol at Aol.com, $100

David Bovill - Open Partnership - $200 + 100 hours development time 
(requirement Product Backcatalog stuff)

>
>
> Money collected to date:
>
>
> Escrow account held at:
> Escrow account number:
> People with access to the escrow account:
>
> Bids/Proposals/Quotes to date:
>
> Changes and Amendments to Proposal (with dates amended):

According to membership rules.

>
> Additional revenue required to start project:
>
> Project assigned to:

Project Managment

> Proposed completion date:

Not required - estimated development time tracked using Sprint Backlog 
graph....

> Project completed on:
> Money dispersed on:
>
> This is obviously a crude "first pass". Let's keep the ideas coming.
> Paul Looney
> _______________________________________________
> use-revolution mailing list
> use-revolution at lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your 
> subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution




More information about the use-livecode mailing list