Boosting allows Grain holders to signal high value things that merit the SourceCred community’s attention. Grain holders do this by staking their Grain to a node to boost it. When things are boosted those who contribute to or engage with those things will earn more Cred because the amount of Cred flowing to that node is boosted. Whoever boosted a node loses their Grain, but they gain a percentage of the Cred that will flow through the node. This incentivizes people to only boost things they think will actually be valuable and produce more Cred in the future, and it incentivizes the community to pay attention to things that are boosted because they will get more Cred for doing so.
So far, SourceCred has tracked contributions at the level of raw activity. Here are some examples of activities we track:
GitHub pull requests
GitHub comments
GitHub Reactions
Discourse posts
Discourse likes
The activity data has been a great starting point. Activity data is easy to collect automatically, so we can get a reasonable baseline for cred scores.
However, using activity data alone has serious issues. Valuing any individual piece of activity can be quite hard, and the activity data…
? :
initiative system . The basic idea is that the initiative will have a bounty amount, and a defined “success condition”. Once the success condition is realized, we mint new cred (equal to the bounty amount), and flow it to the initiative node. From the initiative node, it will flow to the contributions, to the initiative proposer, and to the references.
The bounty getting paid out doesn’t neces…
Do you have an idea in mind of what this might look like?
Here’s my thinking:
Pro: Better UI so that Initiatives and Artifacts are less beurocratic and Cred flows are more precise.
Con: If users are split between platforms that can create breaks in UX. A lot of Ethereum communities have this problem where 90% of all engagement happens on web2 platforms, but then they have to leave the experience to use a separate web3 app for voting or payments or something. As a result, they don’t.
Having …
Disclaimer: This content is outdated.
Please see SourceCred in 5 minutes for the latest overview of the CredSperiment.
This post describes the initial design of the CredSperiment, as envisioned in August 2019. Since then, the system has changed materially. Please view this document as a piece of history in SourceCred’s evolution, but not an up-to-date view of how SourceCred operates.
The CredSperiment creates a game in which people are rewarded for contributing to SourceCred, based on Source…
The key challenge for SourceCred is keeping the cred graph accurate and up-to-date. So far, we’ve depended on a mixture of automatic processes (edges between posts and replies) and well-intentioned user behavior (adding references / citations to relevant work). These approaches have gotten us started, but they won’t scale.
For example, consider the SourceCred poster art . Since the poster uses the logo design, it should have an edge to the logo explorations . It doesn’t, because @LB didn’t do the…
Governance is hard… Appreciate your thoughts on this @burrrata , here and in your latest response on the Discourse Director topic. It’s good to be able to learn from your hard-won experience in these other governance experiments. After digesting, dreaming about this last night (my life these days), and thinking about this some more, have come up with a possible path.
First, in my mind there’s now a distinction between the SourceCred Foundation (or whatever legal entity we set up), and the Source…
What is SourceCred?
SourceCred is a reputation protocol for open collaboration. At a basic level, SourceCred tracks the contributions that are made to a community project. It does this by assigning each contribution and contributor a score, called “Cred”, based on the contributions’ value to the project.
You can think of SourceCred as turning community collaboration into a game. To earn high Cred scores you need to make contributions that the community values. SourceCred itself is dogfooding S…