To clarify, the idea in my original post was not limited to supporting the development of the DAC. I was actually thinking of a skills market where users could interact freely to trade expertise for personal or community endeavours. This would add to the value to the community as well as grow an internal market for usage of bitUSD or other bitAssets.
I have a blueprint for a DAC I called the Joblist DAC. It may be aligned with what you're thinking about:
There should be a decentralized autonomous job posting/listing/matching corporation.https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=998.msg42560#msg42560
Users pay a fee to list a task which needs to be completed along with an expiration date and the currency they'll be paying in. It can also function like a decentralized local community exchange protocol build on top of a blockchain allowing barter.
So for example if you need a website built or a programmer to help you build your DAC you could create a job listing on the Get Work DAC. You could also put your Keyhotee ID on this blockchain so anyone can track all the jobs you did for anyone else and get an idea of how much certain jobs are worth in the labor market.
Could it be built? If Keyhotee is working and Keyhotee wallet is working so we can pay people who have good reputations using some sort of multi-signature transaction, reviewing or rating system, it seems to me it could be theoretically possible.
This idea is revised and refined here: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=1413.msg15246#msg15246
A simple diagram could illustrate the conceptual infographic as:
Input: Human labor--> "Mining"
DAC: Sort algorithm maintains a task list updated by humans stored in the blockchain, where the sort algorithm allows human beings to vote up or down to adjust the priority level "importance" of each task.
DAC: Value is determined by community voted task priority and popularity. If the task is very popular then "difficulty" shall rise to redirect the flow of labor to less desirable more important tasks.
DAC: Maintains a ledger or spreadsheet which constantly updates detailing which Keyhotee ID did which task.
DAC: Can hire human beings or scripts (autonomous agents) to do tasks either separately or working together. (Credits earned by a script can be used by the script to pay humans for the updating of the script)
Keyhotee: Maintains reputations, allows for up or down votes, allows for notice of task completion which again receives up or down vote by a pool of trusted Keyhotee IDs to verify it as true or false. (As an administrator who verifies the work of others you would get paid to check whether or not others have completed their task and the greater your accuracy the better your credit rating or reputation for doing that particular task. You are like a referee for the system. This job may also involve preventing spammers, cheaters, other Keyhotee IDs will anonymously review your work and get paid on their accuracy as well)
Output: Signature campaigns, website development, documentation, FAQs, tweets, YouTube videos, Facebook pages, memes, or anything else.
Output can be measured for success. If an output is considered a failure such as if it is spam, if someone did not follow the rules, or if it has a completely negative impact then that output can be reviewed during the verification process and credit score shall adjust based upon the result of that review. In most cases there should be nothing to review because reviewers would have to be compensated and the anonymous reviewers of those reviewers would have to get their cut as well so this action should be avoided unless a significant amount of people in the community vote for and pay for a review/audit.
Social contract: Any DAC which wants to use the services of this DAC must set aside shares in their DAC to pay for its services. This DAC is to be set up for the benefit of the humans and autonomous agents who work for it and for the community as a whole to benefit from it.
Do any of these ideas look like what you'd like to accomplish? The Ideas I've presented do not require any dilution. It would require donations instead but if there are enough donations it would easily work. The way I envision it the donations could come from cryptocurrencies (blockchains) or from private/public sector partnerships via legal cooperatives.
To the extent that we are talking about contributing skills to the DAC itself, it looks like this has to go via the delegates for now. But there are 101 delegates and over 30000 BTSX accounts (bitshareblocks.com). That means delegates represent around 0.3% of the total skill base in the network, and this percentage will fall as users rise. It seems to me that delegates could potentially achieve much more and more quickly for the DAC if they could "hire" teams (or a network of experts) from within the community to achieve certain goals. There are some limiting factors, such as how much dilution there is to spread around in this manner, the quality of skills required, and practical management issues.
I think this is why I think a separate DAC should be created for the purpose of listing jobs. Some of the concept points I mentioned almost a year ago:
1) A bounty coin where the job or task is distributed according to the percentage ownership of that coin.
2) An algorithm which used voting to let shareholders decide on the priority of what must be done utilizing "Proof of Commitment/Proof of Participation". Really this is not all that different from the "Patronage Points" and "Reputation Credits" concepts I'm pushing today.
3) A job auction system where the blockchain gives the bounty coin to the participant or team willing to complete the task for the cheapest if they meet the right attributes.
There were more ideas I have put out on the forums which I intend to actually use when we have Turing complete scripting. Once we have that then I hopefully will be able to write a script or perhaps build this kind of DAC.
The world of DACs I envisioned required two categories of participants. The participants would have a subset I called the "operators" who basically keep the DAC running. These people are similar to what ultimately became the delegates. The participants basically was anyone who participated in the DAC's ecosystem (the users).
But is it possible to envision a world in the future where there are 101 delegates, each funded with millions of dollars a year in dilution (at a high enough market cap), and each with a network of potentially hundreds of people contributing from the community and getting paid for their efforts?
I'm not certain of 101 delegates having to be 101 individuals. I'm in favor of either a Bitshares cooperative or each delegate becoming a cooperative so that there are 101 cooperatives which we can join or be invited into where members own equal portions of 1:1 (one share per human member) of the cooperative delegate. The cooperative delegate would exist on the blockchain and as a legal cooperative entity off the blockchain which would give a DAC the benefits of both worlds (at least in theory).
It doesn't mean the rest of the community would want to do it like how I envision it. I put the ideas out there sometimes and then wait until people think it through and adopt or reject. It's possible that at some point many of these ideas will have to be tested out in experiments but I think cooperatives have many legal advantages. If I'm a delegate who forms a cooperative then I could let everyone who joins my cooperative get membership in it and share the dilution pay with my membership. This would make it very easy to get both votes and members while also possibly decentralizing in a way which increases security but right now it might not be the time to do it.
I think if what I have described above is possible, then it is simply a pragmatic issue for delegates to determine how much of the dilution proceeds they are willing to pay to experts employed within their network. This is like the CEO of a business. I believe that avoids the issue of the community as a whole having to decide a mechanism for fair splits, but it does make delegate positions more like businesses in their own right, which no doubt comes with other challenges.
Suppose a scenario where I start a cooperative and say anyone who has certain attributes becomes a member of my cooperative. These attributes would be you'd require a good reputation as a giver to the community, as not being a scammer, you'd have to register or verify your identification so we know you're a real person, and from here we give you a membership ID, you become part of a legal cooperative, and you can receive all the benefits from it.
That legal cooperative could be a delegate. Any member would be able to get legally vouchers, Patronage Points, Patronage Rebates, discounts, rebates, etc. So the perks for being a member of the cooperative would be high and instead of the cooperative giving millions of dollars to one person it would distribute the benefits to all the people who are members or partners with it.
In this way the cooperative could encourage the community to develop leaders with a good reputation. It would allow the community to partner with other communities, corporations which have nothing to do with the blockchain, governments, etc. A cooperative can hire people easily using regular legal contracts if people don't want to get hired by the blockchain but if they want to get hired by the blockchain they could but the blockchain would only be a gift economy.