My first reaction is to say that is very hard to know what a CommunityWikiBank is. I mean it needs to read different pages of discussions rich in informations and ideas, but at the end I’m not sure to can explain what is a CommunityWikiBank. So my first thought is it would be interesting to have a clear description of the most important points which describe what is a CommunityWikiBank and maybe it would be a way to explain why CW wants to create a CommunityWikiBank. …for which objective ? It’s a question I often read but I don’t have read really clear answers about it. HelmutLeitner have in a sens answer to it when he says : “we have to define within the CommunityWikiBank how we translate currency to labour and especially what types of work we define. What kinds of work do we want to exchange? What kinds of work do we offer?”

… it sounds like to create a self-managed “umbrella company services” (société de portage salarial)

TedErnst says: ” I’ve proposed a session at the Open Collective (BALLE pre-pre-conference) in Burlington, VT in June about using currencies to create gift economies. Why don’t we use our own community as a practicum for the discussion about how we might do so?”

I’m not sure to understand, does it means to make an experiment to feed the discussion and vice versa ? in this case I find it’s a good thing to transfrom ideas into actions.

It appears different peer to peer payment systems exist, so how a community can make a choice, particularly without a clear common objective it’s seems difficult to answer … before it’s important to know what are the needs to create this CommunityWikiBank or maybe it would be more right to say what are the needs of these workers-shareholders ? a way to be “both judge and jury” ? … --SylvieBourguet

hi . this is a new discussion, isn’t it?
if nobody minds, i’ll make a new page (need a good name (default name is CommunityWikiBankIII)) .

as to the conception: hans did the first account . i think, we should hear, what he has to say about it .

Agree. I’d also agree exporting the main part to MattisLittlePropagandaPage? or whatever, I had some aggressions to get rid of, sry.

Looking over it I think (again): Take the current global money system and look at it as an operation system - which it actual is. Look at it from the programmers POV. Is this open? Is it worth puzzeling around on or in anymore? C’mon hax0rz!

Maybe we need a new license for money? Euros don’t have one anymore, I think. The old Deutsche Mark til somewhat in the 80ies I think still had this text on it of “the bearer of this note gets the amount in gold at the central-bank”. That was a license, wasn’t it? A GPL for money, we need more lawyers actually.

till now we have the possibility to make an account by pledging a sum, even if we don’t have the sum (we hope to have it some day) . but by recognizing it among us as currencies, we can help us reciprocal already today .
what is missing, is an incentive for really depositing the money .
here we need the possibility of a bank to double the money (so, this is given, if we are the bank-holders . but we are the bank-holders) :) .

Is the “Mana” system run by Netznetz possibly an example of what you want to do ? --SylvieBourguet

jepp! Sounds pretty interesting to me.

perhaps it’s the answer, what to do with the cwb-fund . i tried to make a model :) is a Software-based Funding Distribution with goals that appear to be similar to what is currently written at CommunityWikiBank - to gather ‘normal’ (central bank issued) currencies into a slush fund then try to determine a policy for distribution.

According to some of the wording here I wonder if this page is not more about creating a CommunityCurrency? that competes with the central bankers. If that is the case, I am very interested in puzzling and hacking on that.

let’s look at it from the programmers pov . we can define our currency as A (the sum of our currency is always A) . it’s now A and in 10 or 100 years it’s still A . because A stands for “our money” . so what’s more obviously than to compare all moneys with A (1/2 A (1/2 of our money), 1/1000 A and so on)?

is that a normal bank? no, it’s not a normal bank . as mattis said: “we don’t want a normal bank” .
it’s a vision of a super bank . it’s a sort of art . money art

what we are doing here is like exodus 7:12 or numbers 21:9

Hey sigi.

I had fun trying to understand what you might mean by these verses:

7:12. And they every one cast down their rods, and they were turned into serpents: but Aaron’s rod devoured their rods.

Numbers 21:9 And Moses made a serpent of brass, and put it upon a pole, and it came to pass, that if a serpent had bitten any man, when he beheld the serpent of brass, he lived.

It made me wonder if you were talking about how the $ looks like a serpent on a rod or pole.

That made me remember the ‘Caduceus’ which is:

a winged staff with two snakes wrapped around it. It was an ancient astrological symbol of commerce and is associated with the Greek god Hermes, the messenger for the gods, conductor of the dead and protector of merchants and thieves. It was originally a herald’s staff, sometimes with wings, with two white ribbons attached. The ribbons eventually evolved into snakes. –

But then I found:

The Rod of Asclepius is an ancient Greek symbol associated with astrology and healing the sick with medicine. It consists of a serpent entwined around a staff. –

Hmm… Maybe you are saying we should move away from global corporate pharmaceutical profits (Caduceus) toward more natural and righteous healing?

About the equations: I’m afraid I don’t understand. You are interested in how the funds will be distributed but seem to not want to worry about how the currency itself is faulty. I know it complicates things and might need some other page to be examined. I’m looking for a place to have that discussion.

I am most interested in talking about the currency itself with no preconceived notions while simultaneously considering the reasons for it’s existence so that we can try to fill the functions of this tool that are important and useful while removing those which are valuless or harmful.

On this page Mattis asks Do we need a GPL for money?

That is the question I would like to begin to address by first examining the reasons money is used at all and to better answer the questions of WhatIsMoney.

If we could remake MoneyFromScratch, how would this almost magical system most correctly function?

About the reference to Moise and the snake of brass - it makes me think this story is about illusion. People believe that the snake of brass protects them from other snakes but it’s just an illusion based on the fear and ignorance. To really be protected people need to learn how to not be bitten by snakes (education) and how to save people who have been bitten (science).

So if the snake is an image to talk about currency we need transparency to really see the movements of the snake because we need to “see” it to not be bite, I mean need to know which attitude we have to adopt. Snakes can kill us but research about their poison means an opportunity to save people bitten and can also cures many diseases and understands various physiological problems. Snakes can represent ambivalence of our condition. Our capacity to stay alive depends on our capacity to die every time to regenerate our vital ressources. It’s not a problem of quantity but a qualitative objective.

The snake is very important also in the story of the apple (knowledge) with Adam and Eve, because it represents the initiator of a determinant choice: to choose to discover what is behind aspects (becoming mortal) or to choose to maintain aspects (stay eternal). --SylvieBourguet

it’s also psychological . it’s said that a snake can hypnotize little animals . without that, they could easily run away . so, the snake of brass may also break the hypnotic power of fear or whatever ;) .

yeah, snakes. What is money? Ask a representative group of 6 or 80 year old children. “Something you can buy other things for” would be the answer I guess. And what is to buy? “You give money and receive the desired good. The ownership of both items changes.”
Earlier our account-balancing here was in motion a lot because Person A gave 10 currency units to Person B and received 5 units from person C and so forth. Kinda like saying “You’re busy here, I like your work and I support it. Take this as my contribution”. It was a sign of solidarity, I liked it.
In real life many people get advantages from talking bad about other people behind their back without these ever having a chance to understand what’s being talked about them. People make secret appointments to achieve advantages without the knowledge of the public, in other words they conspire. Here when someone receives 5 currency units from someone else it’s completely public, completely transparent. Globally transparent. There is no chance to ever rip anybody off or ever being ripped off by anybody (assumed Oddmuses history would be perfect, k ;)).
I don’t like this Bonobo-dance out there, this is not Homo 2.0, it’s nothing but a reminiscence from the pre-technological era. The snake is an overcome metapher, the new money is a pet. It’s nice and purrs when you caress it! You don’t need it in brass, better use that material for making some french horns. You don’t need to protect yourself, you need to collaborate, to be exact: collaborate with the right people, to be even more exact: with the people you trust.

ok but I would add : the snake of brass is inside of each of us ;) --Sylvie

Perfect picture. Are you this icon of brainwashing media-industry? Are you this fighter? All up to great ideals but distictively drawing the line between Neandertals and Cro Magnon? I don’t think so actually. It is not in each of us. It is just in many disinformed and silly people, true. As I said, the ones you trust. I wouldn’t trust this Jedi bastard. I don’t trust the people who made him up, their system. I might trust you though. You write good stuff here.

Hey Mattis.

I’m intrigued by your interest in somehow applying the GPL to money and think it can be done (in a round-about manner).

You keep mentioning trust. I agree the current Debt Based Fiat currencies require trust, but a currency backed by Productive Sources would not need trust.

The GPL does not utilize ‘trust’, it is simply enforced through property rights.

Currency backed by productive sources. Sounds good.

our most productive sources are our brains, i think . also computers, the internet, wiki, and last not least “trust” .
well, our currency doesn’t need trust . but we bank-holders do . and not only that, we have to make some decisions over the bank and therefore, we need a common agreement . this is not done by putting the questions to the vote: what’s the good of outvoted or dissatisfied people?
but if we have a structure of trust and we can’t unify by argumentation, then the person, we most trust, will decide . because we build that structure, we trust also in ourselves and (less or more) in each other .
look at the picture above: you can interpret it as mankind, deformed through hollywood . but it can also be interpreted as mankind, fighting against its hollywood-deformation (holywood instead of hollywood) . and there is a symbol of unification: the crossing point of the two light-swords (i nearly said light-rods) .
in the same way we can interpret the brass of the snake as trust, the snake itself as a symbol of knowledge and the rod as our wiki-tree . with that we can start MoneyFromScratch .

back to CommunityWikiBank


Define external redirect: MattisLittlePropagandaPage CommunityCurrency