Bounty Specification Discussion

[luckybit]

We have plans to start offering a large number of bounties for every imaginable skill, but would like to establish some formal guidelines so that those attempting to win the bounty can have a predictable experience without many of the problems faced by prior bounties.   This thread is meant to foster discussion on ways to structure bounties to add clarity and prevent disputes or at least resolve them quickly.  The goal of the bounties is not to get the jobs done cheaply, but to get them done quickly and of high quality.   Lessons learned from past bounties:

1) Avoid subjective criteria
2) Keep submissions private to prevent copy cat
3) Set the bounty high enough to justify the risk
4) Define the deliverable clearly
5) Have a dispute resolution policy
6) Deadlines ? 

We would like to establish a checklist by which to rate the quality of a bounty specification and improve upon our execution of the bounties.

This idea would require a fully functioning Keyhotee and some sort of exchange platform but I figure I'll put it up for debate just to make conversation.

How about a bounty exchange platform with an Ask/Bid?

It would be centralized at first but could be made decentralized, and it's one way to determine who would be selected for the bounty in an automated fashion. It may even allow workers to trade jobs on the exchange provided they do so before the expiration date. This way if a worker bit off more than he could chew he could exchange it with someone else and they'd get paid in his place if they complete it.

So basically if there are a lot of DACs which all need a similar job there could be an exchange built into Keyhotee with bids and asks for the really high priority important in demand type jobs.

First you'd put up your bidding price which is the highest you're willing to pay, then a bunch of potential bid fillers put up their asking price and according to the algorithm it would meet in the middle according to supply and demand at an equilibrium point. This would give the market the true price of the labor.

[rysgc]

其实我更关心计划中项目的进程，关于其他理想化的东西可以慢慢来。

Google translate: In fact, I am more concerned about the process of planned projects, on the other idealistic things slowly.

[marx]

  其实我更关心计划中项目的进程，关于其他理想化的东西可以慢慢来。

[rysgc]

I think there should be a sub forum for these things and an 'official' people pool has to be created from which you can pick a 'worker' (sorry too much mining lately).

Then a small but difficult assessment (programming/design/economics/marketing) can be given which should be completed in 2 hours after going public. You can then review these to add a temporary rating to everyone and pick these people based on this ranking. Of course when someone f*cks up or doesn't have the time the 2nd in line gets the job.

Then after a while add a second assessment so people who had lower scores the first round get a chance to redeem themselves.  everyone can just add to their forum status message : AFW (Available for Work)/Programming  so you can quickly see who's up for it.

[bytemaster]

We have plans to start offering a large number of bounties for every imaginable skill, but would like to establish some formal guidelines so that those attempting to win the bounty can have a predictable experience without many of the problems faced by prior bounties.   This thread is meant to foster discussion on ways to structure bounties to add clarity and prevent disputes or at least resolve them quickly.  The goal of the bounties is not to get the jobs done cheaply, but to get them done quickly and of high quality.   Lessons learned from past bounties:

1) Avoid subjective criteria
2) Keep submissions private to prevent copy cat
3) Set the bounty high enough to justify the risk
4) Define the deliverable clearly
5) Have a dispute resolution policy
6) Deadlines ? 

We would like to establish a checklist by which to rate the quality of a bounty specification and improve upon our execution of the bounties.