Dev.SN ♥ developers
Sections
Dev.SN
prospectacle writes:
"An important choice remains for this site. What kind of organisation will we be, practically, legally and financially?
A for-profit, shareholder corporation seems out of the question, by general consensus (correct me if I'm wrong), but other questions remain. The basic choice is this:
Will we be like a charity, a co-op, or a recreational club?
- (Like a) Charity:
Being like a charity means operating for the public benefit. What we produce is news and englightened commentary for the benefit of the world. All our finances and operations would be geared towards this aim. All excess revenue is reinvested into the site. - Co-op:
A co-op is for the mutual financial benefit of individual (possibly paid) members. Three main sub-options for this exist that might be appropriate for this site:
2a) A retailer's co-op. Members use a common organisation in order to make individual profits. For example if members used this site to display their stunning intelligence, and then put their resume or website links on their profile page so people could hire them. Maybe there are services built into the site to find someone to hire who fits your requirements.
2b) A worker's co-operative: Employees share any excess revenue. Some revenue would go to expenses, some would be reinvested, whatever remains is shared among employees.
2c) A buyer's co-op. We exist to get discounts, or to buy together what we can't afford separately. Maybe we're buying well-written news and analysis from professional authors. Or maybe we're bulk-buying electronics, etc, so the price-per individual can be lower. - A Recreational Club:
This takes membership fees to provide access to equipment, organize competitions, etc. Maybe paid members would get to use extra services, like an email account, or storage space, or their own discussion thread area, or software project hosting, or chat-rooms, etc. Non-members could still be permitted, with fewer privileges, and would have to pay-per-use for the extra services (or pay to become a member).
This is a gross simplification, but gives some idea of the options involved. Feel free to offer alternatives. So what should we be, what is our purpose, really? And what kind of a structure is required to make sure we serve that purpose, and that money doesn't end up in the wrong pockets?
Bonus question: which jurisdiction should we set ourselves up in to fulfil our mission most effectively?"
(Score: 0, Flamebait) by Taco Cowboy on Wednesday March 12 2014, @07:24AM
Just because I voiced out my opinion someone immediately modded my comment down with "redundant".
Where is the "redundant" bit ? I have scanned all the other comments (so far 6) and there is *NO OTHER* comment that talked about the points that my comment above has brought up.
Are we going to be as goddamn knee-jerk and as abusive as we did when we were in /. ?
If the answer is yes, then damn this site as we damn /., for there is no point of having a discussion if someone mod a comment down with a frivolous excuse just because he or she does not agree with what that message has conveyed.
If you guys want to behave just like those goddamn fuckers in /., stay back in /.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Open4D on Wednesday March 12 2014, @07:36AM
I agree that your comment shouldn't have been modded down. I wonder if there's going to be meta-moderation at some point. Personally I'm keeping an eye on this [dev.soylentnews.org].
But I disagree about the name being the most important thing. In this thread [dev.soylentnews.org] of today's Status Update story, I argued that we may want to consider sorting out our legal position before deciding on a permanent site name.
(Score: 4, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 12 2014, @08:16AM
I have mod points, but rather than mod you down I'm posting a reply to say nobody likes a whiner.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Wednesday March 12 2014, @10:00AM
123
456
789
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 12 2014, @10:50AM
Actually I modded his original post up because I did think the "redundant" mod was unfair. The worst part about whiners is they're sometimes right.
(Score: 2, Informative) by cwix on Wednesday March 12 2014, @11:56AM
Actually no you cant.
Mod a comment and then post AC and you will see at the top it undoes your moderations. It happened to me yesterday. It did this on /. as well.
(Score: 3, Informative) by efitton on Wednesday March 12 2014, @12:48PM
You can do it if you sign out instead of "Post Anonymously"
(Score: 1) by cwix on Wednesday March 12 2014, @12:55PM
Well, yes I suppose that would work. Too much trouble for me though.
(Score: 1) by Peristaltic on Wednesday March 12 2014, @10:26AM
In a better world, it wouldn't happen, but this is a public site, and it's going to happen. The only way to significantly lessen the noise is to adopt something like the Hacker News moderation system, and while there is useful stuff to be dredged from the discussion over there, the attitude reminds me of a hipster coffee house in Soho. I don't think that would go over very well here.
I understand the sentiment, but you're wasting your time holding back the tide with a rake. Take a step back and a deep breath, then do what most of us did on /. : browse the comments at 2 or 3 and let the moderation system work.
(Score: 1) by monster on Wednesday March 12 2014, @11:59AM
That doesn't work, unless someone actually browses at 0 or even -1 and upmod worthy comments. That is precisely the reason so many interesting comments in the other site were almost invisible, starting from 1 or 0 (even from ACs) while the obvious "¡OMG Ponies!" and links to XKCD would get +5.
I can't speak for others, but for me this is a nascent community that needs encouraging for good behaviors and that is the reason I browse at -1 and almost always upmod instead of downmodding other comments. Please, applaud the good citizens before wooing the bad apples or just ignoring the masses (browsing at 2 and above). This is also the reason I have deactivated my "good karma" modifier: Anything I say should be weighted because of its value, not because it's me saying it. Anyway, that's just my opinion.
(Score: 1) by Peristaltic on Wednesday March 12 2014, @01:07PM
(Score: 2) by mrcoolbp on Thursday March 13 2014, @01:02PM
As I understand it, you can browse at a higher threshold most of the time. If/when you are awarded modpoints, the convention is to make sure you change that to -1 for this reason.
(Score:1^½, Radical)
(Score: 1) by monster on Friday March 14 2014, @03:59AM
But when that happens, are you going to re-read several articles to find those gems that you missed the first time, or will you simply go to those you haven't already read?
Just my 2 cents.