200 PTS - Bounty Rules and Procedures Document [Closed]

[barwizi]

Ok, now comes the fun part.  The team lead must produce an invoice to be submitted to Invictus for payment of the bounty.  It must show who contributed what and how much of the bounty each of them should get.  Perhaps start with a form like this and then use it to compute everybody's percentage contribution. 



The actual ratios and scoring strategy are for you to determine and negotiate with your team except for the final 20% bounty premium.  There you should state in what ways, if any, your team has exceeded the minimum viable product and therefore earned some or all of the premium bonus we built into the bounty budget to motivate professional excellence.

Also, under thought contents, be sure to consider what percent of them came from new thinking developed by your team vs. repackaged original and on-going customer inputs.

This is just an example.  Feel free to innovate in how you document your invoice.  Do this well and it will hopefully serve as an example for all other bounties and will become part of the "How to Do Bounties" package itself.

Thanks

fun part

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BxCtiOzdwvPyM05aTUxNaWlkUGs/edit?usp=sharing

[Stan]

Ok, now comes the fun part.  The team lead must produce an invoice to be submitted to Invictus for payment of the bounty.  It must show who contributed what and how much of the bounty each of them should get.  Perhaps start with a form like this and then use it to compute everybody's percentage contribution. 



The actual ratios and scoring strategy are for you to determine and negotiate with your team except for the final 20% bounty premium.  There you should state in what ways, if any, your team has exceeded the minimum viable product and therefore earned some or all of the premium bonus we built into the bounty budget to motivate professional excellence.

Also, under thought contents, be sure to consider what percent of them came from new thinking developed by your team vs. repackaged original and on-going customer inputs.

This is just an example.  Feel free to innovate in how you document your invoice.  Do this well and it will hopefully serve as an example for all other bounties and will become part of the "How to Do Bounties" package itself.

Thanks

[barwizi]

I took a stab at putting the final polish on the document.

I have checked it against all posted requirements and contributions on this thread from all sources and have tried to boil it down to the essentials.

http://invictus-innovations.com/s/Bounty-Rules-and-Regulations.pdf

To aid in understanding the rules and procedures, I've added an up-front section on their underlying motivations.

Let me know what you think and if it is acceptable, then try applying those rules and procedures to closing out this bounty and we'll see if it works.

 

Much cleaner document with better flow than my own. I note that you have cut out the Dispute section and merged rules with ethics as well as integrating the management parts. Seeing as how invictus is the sole customer this document works. 

[Stan]

I took a stab at putting the final polish on the document.

I have checked it against all posted requirements and contributions on this thread from all sources and have tried to boil it down to the essentials.

http://invictus-innovations.com/s/Bounty-Rules-and-Regulations.pdf

To aid in understanding the rules and procedures, I've added an up-front section on their underlying motivations.

Let me know what you think and if it is acceptable, then try applying those rules and procedures to closing out this bounty and we'll see if it works.

 

[barwizi]

These are good points.

A bounty hunter might propose splitting the bounty to hand off the parts she doesn't want to do to someone else.  This could be done by finding a partner / assistant or negotiating with the bounty originator to partition the task further.

Is this what you meant?

Are these things something we should include in Rules and Procedures? Thinking about it makes it seem like operational stuff, great nut not really something to put in a rule book.

I've made some changes again based on input, would like you to weigh in stan.

[Stan]

These are good points.

A bounty hunter might propose splitting the bounty to hand off the parts she doesn't want to do to someone else.  This could be done by finding a partner / assistant or negotiating with the bounty originator to partition the task further.

Is this what you meant?

[barwizi]

I find rules for software bounties way too much restrictive, so I can propose addition of the Bounty Poster to decide if following some of steps is really necessary to declare real goal achieved (for example, github submission and platform specific testing).

For example, a top level dev may implement very good algo, but creating all the infrastructure for it (git repo, step by step instructions, etc), as well as teaming with others to fulfil that may easily become boring. He may decide just to dump source tree/workspace archive to dropbox and continue with other tasks, so placing software to github can be accomplished by anyone else.

I personally think that software development (as software design and coding) can be easily separated from open source infrastructure support, so I suggest to think how to prevent converting developers to managers by these rules.

Another issue is a bounty split. Let us imagine situation of developing some software optimizations or solution for complicated cryptography protocol problem. There are people who can come with clear explanation of the concept/idea/optimization approach, but will refuse to code that and will even refuse to apply for bounty, and proposed system with record of work may completely mitigate initial concept contribution while focusing on coding/implementation details, leaving "opportunity opener" out of the process. So there shall be a statement/guideline for bounty poster to specifically take care of such situations.

yvg1900

P.S. This is my personal opinion only, given as a response for personal request for comment from barwizi and to support his efforts in putting these things together.

thanks!!! if this particular bounty poster agree then i'll make the suggested changes.

[barwizi]

Just read the document, nothing much to add really and I think it's clear for both the organizing and bounty hunter parties.

Thank you

[yvg1900]

I find rules for software bounties way too much restrictive, so I can propose addition of the Bounty Poster to decide if following some of steps is really necessary to declare real goal achieved (for example, github submission and platform specific testing).

For example, a top level dev may implement very good algo, but creating all the infrastructure for it (git repo, step by step instructions, etc), as well as teaming with others to fulfil that may easily become boring. He may decide just to dump source tree/workspace archive to dropbox and continue with other tasks, so placing software to github can be accomplished by anyone else.

I personally think that software development (as software design and coding) can be easily separated from open source infrastructure support, so I suggest to think how to prevent converting developers to managers by these rules.

Another issue is a bounty split. Let us imagine situation of developing some software optimizations or solution for complicated cryptography protocol problem. There are people who can come with clear explanation of the concept/idea/optimization approach, but will refuse to code that and will even refuse to apply for bounty, and proposed system with record of work may completely mitigate initial concept contribution while focusing on coding/implementation details, leaving "opportunity opener" out of the process. So there shall be a statement/guideline for bounty poster to specifically take care of such situations.

yvg1900

P.S. This is my personal opinion only, given as a response for personal request for comment from barwizi and to support his efforts in putting these things together.

[rysgc]

Just read the document, nothing much to add really and I think it's clear for both the organizing and bounty hunter parties.

[barwizi]

Well....game theory. I have been working on this and trying to fit it into the document. There are developments however that create problems..., fact is that by disallowing third parties to post their own bounties, the only customer is III. Now, bytemaster and i crafted the document with default trust to III meaning some parts no longer apply in this scenario. In order to keep the field clean I want to know if you will be maintaining that position. With III being the only customer by default, and III having default trust with regards to payment and assessment, it becomes a moot point to try and structure the document in a mutually beneficial way since all the power is already centralized by III. At best we can put applicants in a work together or fail situation but somehow i think it will introduce the cut-throat competition that bytemaster said should be discouraged at all cost.

Correct me if i am wrong.

You have the right idea here.  I will push Stan to follow up on this.     

please do so post haste, more bounties are being completed and although people appear to be following this format, we need to make it official for it to have any weight.

[bytemaster]

Well....game theory. I have been working on this and trying to fit it into the document. There are developments however that create problems..., fact is that by disallowing third parties to post their own bounties, the only customer is III. Now, bytemaster and i crafted the document with default trust to III meaning some parts no longer apply in this scenario. In order to keep the field clean I want to know if you will be maintaining that position. With III being the only customer by default, and III having default trust with regards to payment and assessment, it becomes a moot point to try and structure the document in a mutually beneficial way since all the power is already centralized by III. At best we can put applicants in a work together or fail situation but somehow i think it will introduce the cut-throat competition that bytemaster said should be discouraged at all cost.

Correct me if i am wrong.

You have the right idea here.  I will push Stan to follow up on this.     

[barwizi]

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1SQ59LWyNdqZZmmVGJX_R55-kRf8XfebcauIQl4vXkJU/edit?usp=sharing

you can comment on the document, so that we get a clearer picture.

pass your mail address and i will give editing permissions.

[barwizi]

Well....game theory. I have been working on this and trying to fit it into the document. There are developments however that create problems..., fact is that by disallowing third parties to post their own bounties, the only customer is III. Now, bytemaster and i crafted the document with default trust to III meaning some parts no longer apply in this scenario. In order to keep the field clean I want to know if you will be maintaining that position. With III being the only customer by default, and III having default trust with regards to payment and assessment, it becomes a moot point to try and structure the document in a mutually beneficial way since all the power is already centralized by III. At best we can put applicants in a work together or fail situation but somehow i think it will introduce the cut-throat competition that bytemaster said should be discouraged at all cost.

Correct me if i am wrong.

[barwizi]

more and more bounties are being completed, can we get this document in place now? The structures we are putting forward encourage an orderly business fashion and delays offer us no benefits. Institutions are built on material such as this, it is refined and adjusted to conform to changes in culture in atmosphere. For now the document fits the purpose, it should be adopted and we can have clarity in how we conduct Bounties.

My apologies for not getting on with this.  We've been having all-day off-site meetings of the whole Invictus management team all weekend.  GREAT progress is being made, but it keeps us all from doing our normal in-depth interaction with the community.  We'll be getting back to our normal duties tomorrow.

ok. i'll be waiting.