Omit pronouns in favour of specific referents—exempli gratia this
In control markets people predict how well people will evaluate them, if they are given control of part of an organisation
becomes
In control markets people [x] predict how well others [people y] will evaluate the former’s [people x’s] (control market? what you meant by “them” was not clear), if people [x or y (I’ve no idea which party you meant)] are given control of part of an organisation.
I thoroughly searched Google for ‘funge’, and found no results that seem to fit. Please define it, and be specific. If you want to get people interested, you need to tell them what you mean to do; if you are uncomfortable disclosing your idea in public fora to the degree necessary for garnering interest (an ambiguous qualifier, to be sure), then perhaps you might wish to reconsider your approach.
For what its worth, the verb “funge” is what kids these days are funging for phrases like “trades off against”. Some supposed benefits of this verb are that it takes one syllable rather than four, and it explicitly primes for the concept of “fungibility” in a way that highlights how often a tradeoff isn’t being made against two single things, but rather a tradeoff is being considered between some coherent proposal versus a vast array of other possible plans with similar benefits, and partial fractions and/or combinations of such plans, and so on in a vast optimization space that may contain low hanging fruit… even as considering such tradeoffs often runs afoul of sacredness heuristics.
I defined funge in my control market article which I linked to. I was a bit hasty making that comment. I’ll edit it to match the nomenclature of that article.
If you want to get people interested, you need to tell them what you mean to do; if you are uncomfortable disclosing your idea in public fora to the degree necessary for garnering interest (an ambiguous qualifier, to be sure), then perhaps you might wish to reconsider your approach.
I wish for Control Markets (and experimenting with alternative organizational structures in general) to be part of the zeitgeist. This needs prominent real world examples of its use, which in turn needs experiments with the market and a platform for easy usage of a market. Being a market it needs participants in order to experiment with it. I am currently trying to figure out how to get participants.
I think I need to create a youtube video to explain how it might work. Linking to an article seemed to be TL;DR.
Create a basic multi-player browser game (simpler than the MS Hearts interface), then ask for people to play it. Make the game robust enough to test your ideas, yet simple enough that participants can quickly learn the rules and play the game properly—a condition that still allows for great complexity, depending upon the participants.
Run many trials, contrast the results of the games with your predictions, and revise or discard your hypothesis as necessary. Slowly introduce confounds into your game to test its real-world viability. Ultimately run a long-term game (a couple of weeks or so) in a real world setting as a mock trial. Scale up from there.
In other words, experiment. Prove the feasibility of the idea then build around it. Perhaps the above isn’t even necessary; try your best to falsify the idea with the least possible amount of resources, I believe ’twas recommended. The above suggests one manner in which that may be accomplished.
Advice on writing for clarity:
Omit pronouns in favour of specific referents—exempli gratia this
becomes
I thoroughly searched Google for ‘funge’, and found no results that seem to fit. Please define it, and be specific.
If you want to get people interested, you need to tell them what you mean to do; if you are uncomfortable disclosing your idea in public fora to the degree necessary for garnering interest (an ambiguous qualifier, to be sure), then perhaps you might wish to reconsider your approach.
For what its worth, the verb “funge” is what kids these days are funging for phrases like “trades off against”. Some supposed benefits of this verb are that it takes one syllable rather than four, and it explicitly primes for the concept of “fungibility” in a way that highlights how often a tradeoff isn’t being made against two single things, but rather a tradeoff is being considered between some coherent proposal versus a vast array of other possible plans with similar benefits, and partial fractions and/or combinations of such plans, and so on in a vast optimization space that may contain low hanging fruit… even as considering such tradeoffs often runs afoul of sacredness heuristics.
I defined funge in my control market article which I linked to. I was a bit hasty making that comment. I’ll edit it to match the nomenclature of that article.
I wish for Control Markets (and experimenting with alternative organizational structures in general) to be part of the zeitgeist. This needs prominent real world examples of its use, which in turn needs experiments with the market and a platform for easy usage of a market. Being a market it needs participants in order to experiment with it. I am currently trying to figure out how to get participants.
I think I need to create a youtube video to explain how it might work. Linking to an article seemed to be TL;DR.
Create a basic multi-player browser game (simpler than the MS Hearts interface), then ask for people to play it. Make the game robust enough to test your ideas, yet simple enough that participants can quickly learn the rules and play the game properly—a condition that still allows for great complexity, depending upon the participants.
Run many trials, contrast the results of the games with your predictions, and revise or discard your hypothesis as necessary. Slowly introduce confounds into your game to test its real-world viability. Ultimately run a long-term game (a couple of weeks or so) in a real world setting as a mock trial. Scale up from there.
In other words, experiment. Prove the feasibility of the idea then build around it. Perhaps the above isn’t even necessary; try your best to falsify the idea with the least possible amount of resources, I believe ’twas recommended. The above suggests one manner in which that may be accomplished.