Tom Crowl

Ive been talking a lot about Political MicroDonation (under $1) and it's importance. And it's a critical capability on its own... it's a fundamental of political speech. However its a fundamental that is dependent on human technology. This takes us into an interesting area: what role does human DESIGN of that implementation have on its ramifications?

I contend that that design should NOT be haphazard and must first rely on an understanding of possible ramifications. There are both great risks and great benefits so care must be taken.

An analogy might be to Representative Government itself. For example, on one end of this continuum a system with every participant voting on every issue AND on the other end a system granting simply a right to vote on an absolute dictator every 20 years could both be called Representative systems. But both lead to very different results and very different kinds of leaders and citizens. This is why we have constitutions and frameworks.

These are intellectual 'technologies' shaping the implementation of broader concepts.

In other words, WE ALL have a vital role in shaping HOW... 'Web Meets World'...

So now let me bring this Political MicroDonation concept into the real world...

Political MicroDonation is the HOOK!
It's NOT the FISH!

What's the Fish?

I'm coming to that... but speaking of hooks, I'm going to let that one lay there a little longer...

First... on the fundamentals... and leaving aside questions of monetization, technologies, boot-strapping strategies, legal and political issues here and around the world, etc (all of which are vital and ARE thoroughly and easily addressed but not relevant here)...

In its pure essence enabling fluid impactful speech combined with methods of association for directed action IS self-government. This suggests that an Internet capability here is both essential (particularly in large scale civilizations) AND dangerous... just as self-government is dangerous but essential for human development.

SO... when I talk about Political MicroDonation and the Chagora concept I have in mind what I believe is the best manner for implementation from multiple perspectives: practical implementation, sustainability (profitability), social/political/economic/psychological and even evolutionary effects.

And these are very important things to think about.

Because in one way or another these capabilities WILL come.

Gotta take a walk... more later. All work and no play makes Tombo a dull boy!

Coming: Some specifics on a proposed structure and some unexpected positive synergies thereby created. And some risks.

Oh yeah, btw...

From the profitability/practicality side I think it's a no-brainer since I believe that combining microdonation functions with certain networking capacities and feedback leads to substantial, natural and beneficial concentration of long-term repeated usage by both donors and recipients with monetization unreliant on any portion of the transaction between those constituencies. Of course, that means you need to be convinced that this combination has some reasonable likelihood of drawing and holding donors and recipients for repeated use and that there's a way to make a buck from that through other revenue streams. Frankly, I think the profit potential is so huge that it becomes both wise and advantageous to find the proper formula for returning a substantial portion of those profits themselves to the base of donor/users.

And that, in fact, is just one of the smaller synergies.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lhwrcb_iCjE