|
I got this question by email and I will answer it here so others can see it.
_________________________________________________________________________________________ One thing I don't understand is where the money comes from. Someone creates a task and give it a value, someone does the work and you magic up Profit Points out of thin air to pay them, and then you buy the Profit Points back off them for dollars? Or how does it work? Once the exchange is up, who do you anticipate wanting to
buy Profit Points? What value do they have that would make someone
want to exchange Bitcoins for them? Do you guarantee to always buy them at
some minimum price? _________________________________________________________________________________________ The underlying value of Profit Points is future profits of Open-Org.com. This is conceptually very similar to buying a stock in a company or actually having a dollar in your hand (even though we never think about it). The master himself, Warren Buffet, explains this here. The creation of Profit Points out of thin air is conceptually very similar to companies issuing stocks. When companies issue stocks, they usually create new stocks out of thin air, sell them to investors and get cash in return. The investors who did not buy any of the newly issued shares will own a smaller percentage of a company with more cash (higher value). This means that the value of an individual stock is usually practically unaffected by the issuing of new shares. As for Profit Points we issue (create them out of thin air) new Profit Points in return for a bit of work. Assuming that the work that was done is for the benefit of Open-org.com, the work will lead to increased future profits. This means that the value of one Profit Point should increase over time if the new Profit Points that are issued lead to significantly more profits than what they cost. Of course, over time the holder of a Profit Point will get a smaller percentage of the profits, but if the profits will be higher, the amount of cash gotten for the Profit Point will increase over time. As they say, a large piece of a small cake might be smaller than a small piece of a large cake. What will the future profits be? No one can answer this. But the reason why I believe in Open-Org.com is because I believe that we can create an organization which will be superior to existing ones for the following reasons:
I expect our first profits to come from our Paid Question & Answer website, but I already have two specific ideas about other websites we could build. The criteria for the first services are that they should not take too long to develop, so we can start making a profit as soon as possible. |
||||
|
Good
Thanks for editing!
flag
DavidAndersen
Apr 12 '12 at 18:59
Reply
add comment
|
|
 
|
I have added the following section to the "sticky" post on this forum:
___________________________________________________________________________________ Users with more than 5000 Profit Points can create a new task and set the value to 1000 Profit Points or less. If the task is more worth, please set the value to "to be defined" and a contributor with more Profit Points can set define the task. Please note that we try to keep the tasks small here, so that they can be solved in parallel and so that no one will work a lot on a huge task just to see that there has been a misunderstanding and that they are not solving the problem. ___________________________________________________________________________________ If you are unsure about setting the value on a task, then just leave it open and I will set it. I expect us to get a feeling about the value (in Profit Points) for tasks over time. There is certainly lots of potential for abuse. Generally I believe in late punishment of abuse, so that if it is detected, we will put someone under surveillance to get further evidence and let time pass. Once they have sent a lot of time abusing the system, the punishment will be sudden and severe, possibly confiscating all Profit Points. Evidence must be very clear for this to happen, though.
flag
|
||
|
I emailed about having corrected typos in your first post. It turns
out there's no history kept of edits, and you were interested to know
what the typos were. I don't remember, but it was lots of small
things like "can set define the task" in the text you just wrote here.
You only want one of "set" and "define"; they're both verbs in this
context.
|