deobald · March 15, 2018 03:58
diff --git a/lyles-relay-chat-tokens.txt b/lyles-relay-chat-tokens.txt
 Lyle [10 hours ago]
 hey @steven think there is value with integrating a block chain into mattermost/relay to create a token that one spends to contribute to a) the overall space’s channel structure and permissioning, and b) actual content contribution.  for b), the idea of spending tokens (and thus paying gas) to issue a chat into the channel would ensure that content is moderated properly (as there is a natural incentive to not spam the channel). I could see this type of  token moderated channel being useful for gatherings of expensive thought workers (corporate governance, legal, software) where the users of the channel want focused and lean collaboration.


 Lyle [10 hours ago]
 in the context of a typical user, it could also help in cutting down useless chatter, which is a common complaint about both chat and email. (edited)


 steven [2 hours ago]
 it's a strange state of affairs that I can't 100% determine how serious you are here, @Lyle


 steven [2 hours ago]
 I'm copying it over into the open.relay-chat.com dev channel anyway to toss the idea out there... it's certainly not something I'd given a serious thought to. :slightly_smiling_face:


 Lyle [2 hours ago]
 its a bit of a joke hack but there is also some seriousness to it. I would definitely use the tokens to govern my response rate in “professional” work slack chats. in one like this, I’d want more tokens to spend.


 Lyle [2 hours ago]
 but I think it would be cool to actually incorporate real governance directly into the collaboration channel as part of a proof of stake blockchain. yeah, I want to work on that project. no, I think that initiative is stupid. yes, lets add a new channel for that office we opened up last week. etc


 steven [2 hours ago]
 hmmm... that latter part actually sounds legit. are you imagining that a small amount of real money gets transformed into tokens? and then will people with bigger budgets have way more tokens and therefore be louder?

 steven [2 hours ago]
 just like reality!


 Lyle [2 hours ago]
 if you think about it, the act of creating a new channel in a collaboration channel maps to corporate governance in the form of the “org chart” of the channel. and thus simple channel admin decisions like “should we add a new york office channel and who should be permissioned in it” are actually distributed consensus problems. proof of stake makes sense because, say I’m a partner, I can put my stake down on “no fuck new york office, everyone uses USA channel”


 Lyle [2 hours ago]
 it could be real dollars, or just made up value too. no reason it can’t be funny money.

 steven [2 hours ago]
 and funny money is distributed equally or based on a person's rank, somehow, i guess?

 Lyle [2 hours ago]
 however the person who creates the space wants to do it

 Lyle [2 hours ago]
 for masters of spacetime, everyone would probably have same share


 Lyle [2 hours ago]
 but that would be up to whoever created it


 Lyle [2 hours ago]
 alternative models could be an ICO


 Lyle [1 hour ago]
 “we’re creating a workspace for project X, which is a joint venture between a bunch of open source consortiums and silicon valley cloud companies. ICO starts next week, all the participants can buy tokens with real cash or some substitute.”

 Lyle [1 hour ago]
 tokens can be spent on a) contributing chat events to the workspace b) linking to external cloud service files c) structuring the workspace communication channels  / governance d) voting on user stories …


 steven [1 hour ago]
 hm


 steven [1 hour ago]
 the more i think about this the less insane it seems


 Lyle [1 hour ago]
 yeah!  I think its a neat idea. creates natural incentives.


 steven [1 hour ago]
 we were brainstorming yesterday about how to make Relay a "respectful" software citizen — we don't really want eyeballs, we just want people to pay for commercial usage. getting everyone to give up real jobs and stare at a chat screen all day doesn't sound like success but it's actually hard to dissuade your users from doing precisely that.


 Lyle [1 hour ago]
 I bet the value of communication goes up when it isn’t free to make it. but I’d like to test the ergonomics of it. would I be distracted by the bill everytime I wanted to spout off in a channel?
	Lyle [10 hours ago]
	hey @steven think there is value with integrating a block chain into mattermost/relay to create a token that one spends to contribute to a) the overall space’s channel structure and permissioning, and b) actual content contribution. for b), the idea of spending tokens (and thus paying gas) to issue a chat into the channel would ensure that content is moderated properly (as there is a natural incentive to not spam the channel). I could see this type of token moderated channel being useful for gatherings of expensive thought workers (corporate governance, legal, software) where the users of the channel want focused and lean collaboration.


	Lyle [10 hours ago]
	in the context of a typical user, it could also help in cutting down useless chatter, which is a common complaint about both chat and email. (edited)


	steven [2 hours ago]
	it's a strange state of affairs that I can't 100% determine how serious you are here, @Lyle


	steven [2 hours ago]
	I'm copying it over into the open.relay-chat.com dev channel anyway to toss the idea out there... it's certainly not something I'd given a serious thought to. :slightly_smiling_face:


	Lyle [2 hours ago]
	its a bit of a joke hack but there is also some seriousness to it. I would definitely use the tokens to govern my response rate in “professional” work slack chats. in one like this, I’d want more tokens to spend.


	Lyle [2 hours ago]
	but I think it would be cool to actually incorporate real governance directly into the collaboration channel as part of a proof of stake blockchain. yeah, I want to work on that project. no, I think that initiative is stupid. yes, lets add a new channel for that office we opened up last week. etc


	steven [2 hours ago]
	hmmm... that latter part actually sounds legit. are you imagining that a small amount of real money gets transformed into tokens? and then will people with bigger budgets have way more tokens and therefore be louder?

	steven [2 hours ago]
	just like reality!


	Lyle [2 hours ago]
	if you think about it, the act of creating a new channel in a collaboration channel maps to corporate governance in the form of the “org chart” of the channel. and thus simple channel admin decisions like “should we add a new york office channel and who should be permissioned in it” are actually distributed consensus problems. proof of stake makes sense because, say I’m a partner, I can put my stake down on “no fuck new york office, everyone uses USA channel”


	Lyle [2 hours ago]
	it could be real dollars, or just made up value too. no reason it can’t be funny money.

	steven [2 hours ago]
	and funny money is distributed equally or based on a person's rank, somehow, i guess?

	Lyle [2 hours ago]
	however the person who creates the space wants to do it

	Lyle [2 hours ago]
	for masters of spacetime, everyone would probably have same share


	Lyle [2 hours ago]
	but that would be up to whoever created it


	Lyle [2 hours ago]
	alternative models could be an ICO


	Lyle [1 hour ago]
	“we’re creating a workspace for project X, which is a joint venture between a bunch of open source consortiums and silicon valley cloud companies. ICO starts next week, all the participants can buy tokens with real cash or some substitute.”

	Lyle [1 hour ago]
	tokens can be spent on a) contributing chat events to the workspace b) linking to external cloud service files c) structuring the workspace communication channels / governance d) voting on user stories …


	steven [1 hour ago]
	hm


	steven [1 hour ago]
	the more i think about this the less insane it seems


	Lyle [1 hour ago]
	yeah! I think its a neat idea. creates natural incentives.


	steven [1 hour ago]
	we were brainstorming yesterday about how to make Relay a "respectful" software citizen — we don't really want eyeballs, we just want people to pay for commercial usage. getting everyone to give up real jobs and stare at a chat screen all day doesn't sound like success but it's actually hard to dissuade your users from doing precisely that.


	Lyle [1 hour ago]
	I bet the value of communication goes up when it isn’t free to make it. but I’d like to test the ergonomics of it. would I be distracted by the bill everytime I wanted to spout off in a channel?