QuickTopic free message boards logo
Skip to Messages

TOPIC:

Comments on SCENARIO SEQUENCES 4 NES.htm (all items)
Document uploaded 08-20-2005 05:33 PM ET (US)

Who (sort)
When (sorted)
Regarding item # (sort)
^     All comments            15-30 of 30  1-14 >>
30
Larry VictorPerson was signed in when posted
08-22-2005
01:37 AM ET (US)
Regarding item 35
/m21 I believe we need to explore the USER payment system in greater detail. $5/month seems way too small. I prefer to have an entry fee, and then a piece user fee, with specials and bonus offers.

We want Users to consider their time with NES as substitutes for time "out" when they may go to movies or concerts.

But, we don't want anyone to hold back because of money.

Also, people contribute to causes -- NES is a "cause" for which they contribute money (so the system can be maintained) and time as User and eventually F2F member and CPer.

There has long been a tradition that everything ONLINE should be FREE. That is on its way out. More and more users are expecting to pay, and are willing to do so.

If NES meets people's needs, and is seen as a "cause", they will eventually shift their discretionary funds towards NES and NES sponsored ventures.

Asking for "financial affidavit showing expenses >= income" may BLOCK those most in need. I would prefer starting with asking for a simple verbal statement of need - in a way that those who can pay, will. Those who can't pay $$$ might be asked to perform NES scripts that are necessary for the functioning of NES.

I am not worried about too many free loaders. Some free loaders may become embarassed and join. Initially we need USERS of scripts more than PAYERS. We might offer a FREE use of x scripts (from a select category.

In the past month I was embarassed to contribute small sums ($15) to info services that I use DAILY, in their periodic funds drive -- even though I need a fund drive for myself. I could not honestly use their valuable service without contributing something.

The statistics of contributions to causes and charities is awesome. You downplay philanthropy on O.net; but philanthropy IS a major way of support. It won't change the world, but we should not exclude it from our options.
29
Larry VictorPerson was signed in when posted
08-22-2005
01:17 AM ET (US)
Regarding item 31
/m30 I hypothesize that once a person is an active participant in a process integral to an org, there is a "bond" established. I expect there is good evidence for this in research.

If we can early involve a new person in a project that is believed to be integral to NES, there will be a bond - and that could be with User, CPer, Evaluator, SEARer, etc.

Simply completing questionnaires as part of a SelfStudy project for Humanity may do it.

This is in context with my exploratory idea that quick involvement in projects is both a great recruitment technique as well as a means to maintain participation.
Work comes before explicit learning; but the learning is deeply integrated into the work.

In my experience with political campaigns, the most important thing to do is give the volunteer something TO DO, IMMEDIATELY. In the last days of the 2004 elections, once I signed my name I was given a list of people to call and was shown a phone to use.
28
Larry VictorPerson was signed in when posted
08-22-2005
01:06 AM ET (US)
Regarding item 30
/m19 I discoverd this in my teaching and experimenting with my students. It was shocking how many students could not perform a list of steps of instruction. Often, it is not an inability, but a belief that it may not be needed, just jump in and do what feels right. This DOES work in many cases, but also fails in many cases.

YES, in computer software installation there are really only two choices: proceed of punt.
27
Larry VictorPerson was signed in when posted
08-22-2005
01:00 AM ET (US)
Regarding item 23
/m18 "SCRIPTS" as sems takes on a universal character. What we will be composing for others to do creating NES will be scripts. SCRIPTS will move our process forward. SCRIPTING SCRIPTS may be our most demanding activity.

Eventually, Scripting Scripts will become "second nature" for the initiated; but a challenge, always, for the novice.
26
Larry VictorPerson was signed in when posted
08-22-2005
12:55 AM ET (US)
Regarding item 21
/m15 YES, this level of support is a major issue in the commercial computer field. I have many horror tales to tell about DELL and AOL. Sometimes the help is fantastic. Other times it is as if they are trying to get you.

We need to schedule AT CALL help available at all times, even late hours. We may spread NES to Asia! The more PERSONAL the better - but that costs.

REMOTE access to a Users computer is a big step. According to Friedman, it fixed Y2K. At a NES community builds, it will be easier -- but it will not be available at the beginning.

I have been on phone for HOURS with help lines. A good earphone set is very useful. We may need to go beyond the CP in providing this service. DELL pulled back its service for corporations to the US, but left its service for individuals global. Yet, global may be better. Yet, at the beginning we will not have that access -- unless we can make NES a global enterprize from DAY ONE. Is this possible?
25
Larry VictorPerson was signed in when posted
08-22-2005
12:44 AM ET (US)
Regarding item 20
/m14 YES -- but someone must compose the text of these messages. There are many, many little tasks that need to be performed, and their performance "evaluated" before posted for the whole world to see.

I am very sensitive to knowing whether what I just did on my computer/online actually TOOK. This morning I composed a comment to a blog but did not see that it TOOK. It was only hours later that I saw my comment, and wonder what happened to my complaining followup wondering whether or not what I did happened.

YET, for many systems there will be time delays, and maybe many more in the future as The Internet overloads. We need to design for variations in The Internet.

The RESPONSE TIME for our system is something we will need to attend to.
24
Larry VictorPerson was signed in when posted
08-22-2005
12:35 AM ET (US)
Regarding item 17
/m13 This is basically a challenge for Art or other computer experts. We need to deeply think ahead as to what we want to do with the data, so that it can be stored for ease of access. To later decide to do more can create big headaches.

In the old systems, as at my college, each new data study required the writing of a new program. I hope we are well beyond that Neanderthal era, but who knows?

But, maybe the technology has gone to a new level, that data in any form can be used in any process. I don't know.

ALL stakeholders need a say on what is done with their data.
We will need educational/orientation material on how data can be stripped of personal name and used statistically -- along with how hackers may be able to backtrack to the source. Many will need an "education" about the multi-dimensional issue involving: privacy, authenticity, transparency, protection, etc. Especially as identity theft become a bigger problem, and the misuse of databases by insurance and other corporations.

This is itself a major issue that only a few aspects are being considered by those planning "security".
23
Larry VictorPerson was signed in when posted
08-22-2005
12:23 AM ET (US)
Regarding item 16
/m12 Some people LOVE to complete questionnaires, expecially if they reveal things about themselves, and in comparison with others. I like polls where after I respond I see the stats at to other responders.

The GAME FORMAT should be used as much as possible. Non-Competitive Games were once a big thing.

Maybe we can ask explicitly how they would best like to give us their information.

In the early days of Arcade Games I saw such potential, which has YET to be seen.
22
Larry VictorPerson was signed in when posted
08-22-2005
12:17 AM ET (US)
Regarding item 15
/m11 Good initial list of projects to work on.
How do we compensate "coordinators" and "leaders"?
21
david-braden
08-21-2005
06:27 PM ET (US)
Regarding item 35
User charged a nominal periodic fee. At $5 per month many will choose annual subscription but system must distribute based on what was paid for any pay period.

Also want to offer a "Give the gift of Knowledge Option" where Users can contribute money to allow participation for those who cannot afford the subscription fee.

Indigent Users served on a first come first serve basis. Submit financial affidavit showing expenses >= income.
20
david-braden
08-21-2005
06:23 PM ET (US)
Regarding item 31
You need to expound further on this. It sounds intriguing.

A self test of User competency in 1) computer skills 2) level of spiral dynamic development? 3) other?

Helping NES map the development level of participating populations? Or another project?

Who is bonded? User and NES? Is this based on a specific feedback? Can we make participation in the project an ongoing attractor?
19
david-braden
08-21-2005
06:17 PM ET (US)
Regarding item 30
For people in this category we may need to design scripts like those used for software installation. At each step, there are only two choices <back> and <next>.
18
david-braden
08-21-2005
06:14 PM ET (US)
Regarding item 23
Yes, many different types of scripts for many different purposes.
17
Larry VictorPerson was signed in when posted
08-21-2005
06:12 PM ET (US)
Regarding item 13
/m9 I imagine a number of factors playing roles in calculating the compensation of the CPer. These variable need be presented in various formulae.

First, there is the User's eval - which may have different variables we weigh differently pre circumstance. This may be weighted by an evaluation of the User's prior evaluations -- or a test to deterime empirically his evaluation bias. We must also guard against a CP-User fraud team, or a CP getting a number of crony users to highly evaluate their scripts (possibly by not even using them as anticipated). There are potential frauds in the system.

What if a user devotes some considerable time to a script, but decides not to complete it. Will there be partial compensation?

What about compensation for Alpha and Beta testing of scripts, if we were to use this system?

Somehow scripts that involve the user for significantly longer times should be given more value.

If scripts are previewed and approved, a rating by reviewers could put the script in categories for different rates of compensation. The amount of time given to script production may also be a factor.

Should scripts that are very popular be awarded the same compensation no matter how often used -- or should there be a "depreciation". I can easily imagine a script template that could generate hundreds to thousands of different scripts, that once the template was constructed and the means to access the urls to plug in, could be put on an assembly line. Should all these be compensated equally?

Scripts used by teams can have individual as well as team evaluations. If a team of 5 uses a script, is this 5 times compensation? Also, if a script is produced by a team, but team members contribute differential effort - how is the compensation to be distributed?

Scripts may be produced as systems of sub-scripts - which could be individually used. Do we compensate extra when a user (or team) completes a whole complex of scripts?

We need to protect against a user repeatedly using a script, just to pump up the compensation - but I can imagine scripts that might well be used multiple times, especially if they have branching points. A user may return to a script once used when triggered by other activity and repeat it, using it in new ways.

Some scripts may openingly invite and involve users, which leads to a modification of the script - do the users become part of the scripting team and earn compensation? If we store "completed" scripts in "readonly" form, we block those scripts that invite user contribution (which might just be data for the script, as distinct from new sems added by a user). The data for a script may be stored in a means by which it can be added to, while the basic script remains readonly.

It may be that we have a family of script types and compensation formulae that CPers can chose from.

I DO LIKE THE IDEA THAT A CREATIVE PERSON COULD CREATE SCRIPTS AND EARN A BIT. It is really very difficult to find honest online piece work - most of it are scams like stuffing envelopes where you get paid only for those recipients of your mailing (you pay for stamps) who responded to the mailing by ordering what was promoted.

We still need to consider compensation for SEAFers and Evaluators. Getting messy?
16
david-braden
08-21-2005
06:12 PM ET (US)
Regarding item 22
Promote, Recruit, Select, Orient, Support
15
david-braden
08-21-2005
06:10 PM ET (US)
Regarding item 21
I imagined this as a list of Evaluators who would mark their names as available when they log on and note that they are working with someone when actually giving advice. They would need visual and auditory notification when a User needed their assistance. (What are the technical requirements to allow the Evaluator to log on to the Users computer during the session - see what the User sees - manipulate the Users GUI and Mouse?) 800 phone number?

This may be the most important service to retain new Users. We have discussed whether we could get CPs to perform this function for free by explaining how it would give them an advantage in developing scripts and keep the Users whose subscriptions pay for Content. Some other compensation for Evaluators?
^     All comments            15-30 of 30  1-14 >>

Print | RSS Views: 1287 (Unique: 678 ) / Subscribers: 1 | What's this?