Developing a community that develops code - organization first

in hive-127586 •  4 months ago 

TL;DR: I'm looking for volunteers to help bootstrap Steem's best open source incubator.

Background

Last weekend, I posted the articles, Programming Diary #22: Boosting organic conversations and reflecting on support for open source development. and Should we reconstitute the Steemit development incentive program as a permanent online steem hackathon?.


Public domain, AI-generated image

In these articles, I started considering the possibility of using Steem communities to support Open Source Development for the benefit of the entire Steem ecosystem. Here is the Cliff's Notes version of one possibility from the first post, a "perpetual Steem hackathon".

Perpetual Steem hackathon: Community participants announce their goals for the next two weeks and post their progress, and gain support from investor-curators who are dedicated to supporting development. Efforts could be on any open source project that benefits the ecosystem: new or existing, coding, documentation, design, testing, etc...

Feedback in the comments has been mixed, but we received this response from Steemit, the Steem ecosystem's largest stakeholder.

Interesting to see where the Community can take this...

#votesavailable

So, I'm considering that a green light 🚦 to explore next steps. Where do we go from here?

Step 1, of course, is to start getting organized. To do that,

Let's talk about decentralized governance

Before moving forward, let's go back in time and recall concepts from some articles that I wrote in 2016 and 2017,

For today, I'm thinking about framework, not details, so none of us need to be experts at any of these so-called "social technologies". You can start with this video for a basic overview, and we can revisit these concepts later if/when needed.



It's been a long time since I reviewed those sources, but here's the bottom line (as I recall it). Sociocracy and Holacracy (and I think there was another, but I'm not finding it right now) are governance strategies that are specifically intended for decision making in decentralized communities.

Sociocracy emerged from the Dutch Quaker community in the 20th century, and is built on four basic principles:

  1. Shared decision making based on consent,
  2. Circles as semi-autonomous units,
  3. Connecting circles by double-linking, and
  4. Electing people to functions and tasks

Holacracy may or may not have emerged from Sociocracy, but it's very similar. In Holacracy, the governance strategy is comprised of circles, links between circles, roles, and authorities (property rights). A "link" between circles is a person who is a member of two circles. Those people are responsible for conveying information between circles.

I asked a bunch of different AI assistants what circles we would need in order to implement Holacracy as a decision-making strategy for a community like this, and none of them really gave me a satisfactory answer, but here's a short list that I excerpted from Llama and ChatGPT:

  • Circle of Planning: Defines the purpose and goals of the community; Oversees the strategic direction of the community.
  • Circle of Rules and bylaws: Develop and maintain community rules and bylaws; Address licensing considerations and eligibility criteria
  • Circle of Operations: Manages the day-to-day activities and tasks of the admins and moderators
  • Circle of Curation: Manages curation-related activities in the community.
  • Circle of Developers: Focuses on development activity in the community
  • etc...

This is already getting too complicated too fast, but hopefully you get the idea. What I'm thinking is that we can gradually identify, create and fill the circles, roles, and links that we'll need for our hypothetical community and establish a shared decision-making model that is a Steem-specific version of these social technologies.

For now, let's go back to Gall's Law:

A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a simple system that worked. The inverse proposition also appears to be true: A complex system designed from scratch never works and cannot be made to work. You have to start over, beginning with a working simple system.

Let's start with the simplest possible system

For this week, I'm proposing that we launch a single circle - a planning circle. Members of this circle will be responsible for the following (with community feedback):

  • Choose a community name
  • Define the purpose and goals of the community (with more specificity than just "support open source development")
  • Oversee the strategic direction of the community
  • Create circles, roles, functions, tasks, and/or authorities, as identified and needed

I would suggest that, at a minimum, the circle should have representation from the following stakeholders:

  1. Steemit and any other "whale" investors who want to participate
  2. One or more top-20 witnesses
  3. Developers
  4. Other Steem influencers/stakeholders

So, our very first community decision making challenge is this:

Can we populate the planning circle?

I guess I'm in by default, but once the circle is populated, I can be voted out, just like anyone else.

Who else is interested in helping to bootstrap Steem's best open source incubator? Feel free to nominate yourself or someone else.

I'll approve the first person to join me in the planning circle, and everyone who joins after that must be unanimously approved by all of their predecessors (and that's also how we'll determine the final size of the circle). If private communications are needed, we can use encrypted STEEM memos, steemchat.org, and/or agree on some other platform.

(some relevant knowledge/experience and a positive standing in the Steem community is required)

If no one volunteers, I'll start nominating people. 😉 And, if no one still volunteers, then we'll scrub the project.

Who's in?

🤞🤞🤞


Thank you for your time and attention.

As a general rule, I up-vote comments that demonstrate "proof of reading".




Steve Palmer is an IT professional with three decades of professional experience in data communications and information systems. He holds a bachelor's degree in mathematics, a master's degree in computer science, and a master's degree in information systems and technology management. He has been awarded 3 US patents.


image.png

Pixabay license, source

Reminder


Visit the /promoted page and #burnsteem25 to support the inflation-fighters who are helping to enable decentralized regulation of Steem token supply growth.

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  

I have lots of scattered thoughts - some of which link back to your previous post...

Thought 1

I pretty much agree with everything in this comment.

Most of the development that I've seen since joining has been the result of a "passion project" or a user's desire to learn, investigate and experiment. Or something's annoyed them. From my experience prior to #proposal-86 (alternative interface, club status, zombie apocalypse, etc.), the rewards would only reflect a tiny percentage of the effort involved - hence the need for an alternative, non-monetary motivation.

Thought 2

The idea of having a team of stakeholders whose votes will accumulate in order to fund projects is pretty much the existing DAO (we are all essentially sacrificing a portion our rewards to fund it). I think that it'll take quite a long time to accumulate enough to fund a meaningful couple of weeks development.

Thought 3

Linking in to Thought 2, the primary difference that I see between this proposal and the DAO is the timeframe involved - i.e. short sprints vs. long term funding. @steemchiller's suggested to me in the past about the creation of a "min-DAO" or "DAO-light" which could use the same source of funds but allow people to submit "micro-proposals", for short-term, smaller projects. If steemchiller gets a moment, I'd be interested in him sharing his thoughts on your post.

Thought 4

Thinking beyond the scope of the community to run/manage this - what is Steemit's over-arching strategy of what it wants to (or needs to) be? What will attract external investment which will ultimately increase the price of STEEM? Using Hive as a good example, they've spent loads of money on dApps - a fragmented strategy filling the pockets of the individuals running each project. Their cartel will claim "value for money" but the only project that's had a noticeable impact upon the price of Hive was Splinterlands - which the cartel felt threatend by and ended support for.

It'll be interesting to see if/how we can reach a consensus as to what the vision of Steemit and STEEM is. #proposal-86 has the vision of making steemit.com a superior blogging experience to its competitors - therefore leading to better quality bloggers / a more attractive blogging proposition. Would an alternative interface help this or detract from it? (i.e. hive.blog vs. peakd.com - does the alternative simply belittle the core?)


As per my introduction, my thoughts are scattered. I can't help but feel that the DAO should already be fulfilling this purpose and perhaps all that's missing is an appropriate forum for discussing and agreeing to ideas (Suggestions Club) before a DAO proposal is submitted and accepted. Which also feels like the role of the top witnesses and what they've been voted to do.

Apologies if this appears confused - no time to proof read.

Loading...

It's great that things are moving 🥳. I think the planning circle needs people who understand something about programming, otherwise you can plan all kinds of nonsense. And the first ones that come to my mind are @the-gorilla and @moecki. Both are of course busy, but love to join discussions related to the future of Steem. So I invite them to think about it 😀.

I think that at the same time it is necessary to gather people who can provide resources for support, because without this, nothing will work. A lot of explanatory work will probably be needed here.

I agree that the planning circle needs people who understand programming, but other skills are probably needed, too. I think Project management would be useful, and so would an extrovert personality style.

I love how you are taking things forward. If we can build something like the Steem Hackathon and promote it to the right people, I'm sure we will soon have more people joining Steem and developing for it.

I am working around the idea of creating ads that will target fresh graduates, and interns, who are looking to build a portfolio in blockchain development or any senior developers looking to gain more experience in the field.

I was also thinking if we find and direct new devs to develop on Steem - shouldn't there be a sort of guideline which includes all resources (including the list of all proposals in Steem Suggestions like you already said) - something like How to Get Started?

It's easier to get in and stick around when the environment is more welcoming and supportive.

I was also thinking if we find and direct new devs to develop on Steem - shouldn't there be a sort of guideline which includes all resources (including the list of all proposals in Steem Suggestions like you already said) - something like How to Get Started?

I agree. There's a lot of documentation that could be created in order to attract new developers and help them when they get here.

It's easier to get in and stick around when the environment is more welcoming and supportive.

💯 - Very important point.

I would welcome to pro developers join steemchat.org its best ever tool we made for communication
Millions of users are available here

https://steemchat.org

Its fully encrypted chat with custom_json operation

It's good to see forward thinking in motion. I wish I brought more to the table in terms of programming skills.

The potential for Steemit is extremely high...with Facebook rolling out 'professional mode,' they've been giving bonuses to content creators (normally nearly next to nothing...TONS of post views/interactions are needed to earn substantially), which certainly opens the possibilities up in terms of interest from end users AND creators who want more from their community. Those social companies are notorious for lowering the earning scale over and over (which they have done every month since the professional mode rollout). That mindset should give way to a need for sites like this (the investment angle may hurt getting younger people interested). I'm in the social media/content field and can tell you that with AI taking over, the need for social community interaction will eventually shift to 'metaverse-type' communities once the gap is bridged between the cost of technology and user need. Just my .02

Thanks for the feedback, and welcome to the blockchain!

The potential for Steemit is extremely high...with Facebook rolling out 'professional mode,' they've been giving bonuses to content creators (normally nearly next to nothing...

I agree. Also, Twitter, Locals, YouTube, Rumble, and Substack all offer monetization now. I definitely think that the model of paying social media content producers is taking hold throughout the industry. We just need to get better at creating an ecosystem that attracts people.

I'm in the social media/content field and can tell you that with AI taking over, the need for social community interaction will eventually shift to 'metaverse-type' communities once the gap is bridged between the cost of technology and user need.

With that background, I definitely look forward to hearing your perspective on things as you get familiar with the platform.

In the generally perceived spirit of optimism, it actually seems possible to change things for the better (both socially and platform-related ;-))

I have always been a friend of the model of a council republic. All the things you name as representatives, but in changing formations. This brings me back to the fact that rigid teams, routines and habitual processes can make life and responsibility much easier. But they also harbour the danger of becoming blind to the business and getting stuck in a rut.

Incidentally, the council republic is based on a combination of elective functions and rotation. In other words, representatives elected by the wider community and a longlist, on the basis of which each individual is temporarily integrated.

If I am now correct in my perception that the Steemit team is no longer happy with its self-elected and then poorly established role here in the Steemit universe, the way is clear for real decentralisation and will certainly be supported accordingly...

I'm not familiar with the "council republic" concept. A quick scan of search results is interesting, because the concept seems a lot like "federalism" which has been used in the United States, since its founding, but the search results are dominated by examples from places like the USSR, China, and North Korea. I'll have to learn more about this.

The one thing that occurs to me is that we would have a very hard time implementing democratic voting here because it's so easy to create alternate accounts. I guess the councils would have to be small enough that it's possible for members to know one another personally.

I think that the elected councillors naturally need the votes of the users and should therefore be known. At best, they should present themselves openly and transparently. The other rotating members could use as many fake accounts as they want. Participating in committees, getting involved, takes time and requires real conviction. If you don't have either, you disqualify yourself.

@tipu curate

Upvoted. Thank You for sending some of your rewards to @null. It will make Steem stronger.


1.gif

TEAM 7

Congratulations, your post has been successfully curated by Team 7 via @𝐢𝐫𝐚𝐰𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐝𝐲

Thank you, @irawandedy.