Weighted Average Industrial Democracy

A weighted average industrial democracy, like the one I set up at https://www.SpaceHose.com, can guarantee employment to all that pay a subscription fee, say as a labor guild fee, starting at something low like $9.95/month, and it can vary such that instant profit (gross minus cost of labor, parts, etc.) is paid-out so that your voluntary percentage of the pool you pay is the percentage of the profit you make. The guild votes on everything, where everyone is a board member with founding webmaster as CEO, tax-less with foreign corporation status (overseas trust funds, foreign payment processor, tax audit insurance). For job posts and labor, the member(s), probably one person or a group within what may be thousands of members, can post a job, including a worker that hires himself, and if more revenue is needed than he has money for, he can request funding from the general pool. “Yes” or “No” decisions must have a deadline, say one day to one month, depending on what the topic-offering member feels is necessary to get a poll question answered, where less informed members can be educated by replies, other non-private voting, ratings, changed vote if necessary, and cloture ends with an expiration of poll. Otherwise, as a vote/rating by the pool, because I am more of a nuances of gray person, the amount you ask for a job, before, during, and after, I believe should be based on the preponderance of the evidence and what might be partial pay-outs by a individuals with their profit sharing money. Treasury should be controlled by bonded CEO and President and credible escrow service.

So if you get an above-average rating (above two-and-one-half stars, or 50%) multiplied by the sum from one to the number of votes [1 / n!] (one over n-factorial, the one power series that doesn’t go to y = infinity) divided by natural log e, you get a score that cannot exceed 5 stars but is higher relative to ratings with lower numbers of votes. If lower than 2.5 stars, you must instead divide natural log e by the sum of [1 / n!), so a low score with a lot of votes is penalized more, no score lower than 0 stars possible.

Parts can be purchased by member/employee if cheap enough, otherwise he/she must bid to the general pool for funding, and piece by piece get what they need for the brick and mortar project if no deadlines or “Yes/no” decisions are best for protocol to ease the burden of not getting enough members to vote in enough time, else if very expensive, must appeal to higher spending investors in the pool. They have leverage, if not funded completely, to go elsewhere for funding and charge for admission, sales, etc., of their creation.

Proposals can start with a job request or post for self-hiring individual, on a local forum. There should be a link to a resume page, references (social media posts by others about you, good recommendations coming from pages with high Alexa scores). The proposal is the cover letter, and others, before job bid, can apply “varying degrees of acceptance” and test the applicant, where it is an essay exam (you learn little from multiple choice) and percentage success is the score based on votes and ratings. The forum search engine is critical, where you are sought out by keywords, and timelines of what must happen first (like simulations before you spend a lot of money on a space cable) will be the responsibility of CEO and chair-people at the head of team management tasks who work with everybody on proper statistical process control (brain-storm, fish-diagram to brainstorm for all possible sub-categories) so confidence level is at least 95%, where worst case scenario and all challenged weakest links with input from sought-out specialists, and general inquiry from the large pool, are fully exploited, leaving no stones unturned. Remember, you learn more from your mistakes than successes, and if documented and shared, improvement occurs as a team faster. Most discoveries happen by accident, like America and the microprocessor, and you cannot invent the wheel, only re-invent it (even the wheel may have been discovered by accident, say, if a caveman skipped on a round rock). So mistakes should not be punished, but rewarded, where more routine work can be re-assigned to younger people for character building jobs to do drills to master right to be more creative and analytical. People must do what they are most passionate at and talented at, and be honest about liabilities, and prosper from good karma as the double-standards of a greedy traditional society will not with-stand social Darwinism as governments collapse. Commission causes you to save and invest to reduce inflation, a better incentive to be happy and productive, not miserable and unproductive, with less risk of loss to guild.

Any creation must, after completion, go up as a page to be voted on and rated. A blogger, an editor with replies, a programmer with a plugin rating and votes, a system’s administrator with a blog post, any can ask for votes and ratings as forum/paid member employees, brick and mortar as well, as workers who contribute to this website (a development server will be set-up and I will transfer content to live server daily, for programmers, system administrators, and artists, and that includes online simulations, static and dynamic, artists, etc.) as well as brick and mortar contributions who verify their contributions with time cards, witnesses, upload-able video, etc., or other “units of work”. You can vote on whether compensation should be commission or salary, based on hours, project estimate, or for electronic work – number of characters of voted/rated-and-approved code/administrative documents, MB size for files for graphic design/video (vector graphics take up much less memory/storage, so there will be a correction based on average number of hours of work for vector graphics as a ratio over bitmap graphics), and/or competitive wages with market and acceptance based on scoring algorithm for exam taken for hiring and/or completion of a task (essay, graded by all based on keyword relevance/density, back-links/votes/ratings by others in pool who reply to “Worker Application Forum” and references outside pool on social media pages, and high Alexa/PageRank of external pages that endorse candidate], ratings, etc.), resume and cover/letter/proposal. Even voters/raters, if members, get paid for votes and edits as they are replied-to/commented-on, and this is a good way to get your guild-portal noticed, where you use social media, social media managers, etc., to follow and be followed, share, like, engage, etc., and let everyone there know, you can earn money just for rating, voting, and be part of an effort to advertise your website with an irresistible proposition to bring in new traffic and sales, which is otherwise 99% of the reason start-ups fail – no good advertising. Be paid, in essence, to use social media, forums, other forms of advertising, do give others a chance to verify a scam-proof, testimonial-driven way of earning income, where the voter-rater testimonial givers are paid to do your advertising. To be branded, does the customer know you, and do they trust you? You can pay the customer a percentage of the business, based on ratings and votes, to offer customer serviced, like I do at https://www.PandaBusters.com, for large volume permission-based robot advertising. Therefore it is necessary that non-members rate pages as well, as the customer and surfer are always right. There is the potential for the worker to earn constant income well after there creation, with no need for lawyers or contracts for licenses, where the bad guy usually wins.

All work, to be compensated after the fact, most go up on the website as a blog page for individual credit. Whether it is a program, like a chat plugin, that’s being rated, a post from a static blogger, even the editor, who reads, corrects, and comments on the changes, construction workers with a post highlighting their achievements, you all get votes and ratings, with the responsibility of getting your postings seen, through social on website or elsewhere, good SEO rankings for page, e-mail everyone in your contact list, etc., be persistent, and offering affiliate commission with a tracking system is also good.

So in summary, while votes can affect policy to change company charter a number of different ways, I suggest the following for a charter:
1. Profit sharing, where profit is the money left over after costs are paid, is evenly divided by the amount the board members pay in subscriptions/monthly dues, based on the percentage of dues they pay, and allocated to each member the 15th of the following month
2. Job proposals, for parts and labor, are the responsibility of the member to post a job offered, or respond to a post at the help wanted social media forum, to solicit work and get revenue from individual social media forum members who actually pay. There needs to be an agreed upon time limit where bidding ends, and job proposer must decide to terminate job consideration or resubmit. The needed funds go to one of several possible bonded escrow accounts, until minimum needed to complete first or successive phases of a project are transferred to the worker (who may manage or represent a group) else transferred back to contributors if amount does not meet the minimum amount stipulated by one of the contributing individuals
3. Contributing individuals, or customers, share in profit or loss where bonded escrow services (and you need competition between escrow sub-groups, who are themselves members) with enforcement through encryption, not trust, as PayPal, Bitcoin, etc. money transfers are password protected accounts (with e-mail sent to inbox for verification, hints created, limiting log-in re-tries, and SMS password re-assignment for change/verification), where one escrow sub-group can set-up payment processors for allocating percentages of gross right at the instance of each purchase of job applicant’s product/service, which are percentages job applicant and investors agree on, and the pool or community gets the same percentage of gross versus that of one or more individual investors in terms of what community invests. So, let’s say job applicant gets 10%, two contributors agree to share remaining 90%, if community needs to fund additional $1,000 of a $2,000 contract, the community is 50% vested, so 50% of gross goes to the community, 22.5% to each of two individual investors, and 5% goes to the worker – no need for one month delay in payment, lawyers, contracts, etc.
4. For social media forums – follows, likes, shares, votes, ratings, keyword relevance, and categorical information are all important – keep it simple and make it mostly subjective, not objective, where these values, shared and not private, affect the ability of member to win contracts (and that includes escrow members and investors who receive many levels of replies with likes, ratings, etc. to affect their ability to win contracts or be solicited for them), and promote them, but:
a. Because the individual has more control over his/her own destiny than the group, and there will always be conflict over the fairest way to allocate community funding, individual contributions should at first decide what projects are actually funded, but as for the membership dues and group profit/deficit treasury money:
b. The pro-community aspect, which is profit sharing, dictates that members “collectively” benefit when the bonded escrow agents automatically transfers a percentage of membership dues/treasury-money based on “pre-Raterank”, as discussed at http://www.MyRatingSearch.com for any ratings/votes, possibly coupled with individual contributions. For all funds in the treasury, let’s say there are 10,000 members, and a one week long proposal terminates, with 100 members giving the project an average rating of 8 (based on 0 to 10, or 4 of 5 stars). This means 8 x sum of 1 to 100 of [1/n!]/e (natural log e = 2.71…), pretty close to 8, deprecated slightly, much more so with only 2 votes. If the rating is 2, then for anything below 5, the adjusted score is 2 x e/(the sum of 1 to 100 of [1/n!]), close to 2, deprecated slightly, but improved with only 2 votes, as bad scores improve because of lack of votes. For now, decisions to fund by community should be weekly, say Monday, 12 noon PST, where for any one project, the percentage of pre-Raterank of 1/4 the treasury money (for 1/4 of a month), combined with individual contributions, to determine if funding all projects minimum request is enough, ranked by highest pre-Raterank first. For projects that fail, a new iterative (recursive) calculation is done to see, if two or more projects fail because of lack of community funding, the ones that still rank higher but miss by the smallest margin, if there is enough funding, will qualify on second round, and escrow people will move forward.

The summary of 1.-4. is my best to deal win “the burden of voter responsibility” when you have too many members and not enough voters.

Skip to toolbar