Thanks for your feedback, Daniel. My take on this 1999 study you point to is that it has some major flaws when taken into current context:
- The world was extremely different when this study was conducted. The sharing economy did not exist. There were only ~195M people on the Internet globally. Etcetera. - RE: "*If the size of the monetary reward is not large enough to compensate for the loss of intrinsic motivation, overall engagement can decline*": We can easily solve this simply by increasing the reward amount. With the first basic implementation of extrinsic incentivizing -- i.e K8s experts and/or charities get paid in BTC/fiat only when they respond to K8s user questions via the 21 system -- we have a reward <https://21.co/kubernetes/> of $5 set for each reply. That can easily be adjusted up to $20 and far beyond. Balaji Srinivasan shared with me earlier that 21.co/ethereum routinely sees users paying $10 for answers from Ethereum experts. - (Some help with framing thanks to Balaji here)... Regarding the net result as is implied in the 1999 study and in other areas as Tim alluded, I think in most areas generally the introduction of market dynamics really improves the overall experience. There are certainly edge cases like the ones that Dan Ariely <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_Ariely> identifies, but these need to be kept in perspective against the gigantic examples of (say) communist vs capitalist China, or communist vs capitalist Eastern Europe. Most of the time, you are replacing a breadline with a market. HTH! On Sat, May 27, 2017 at 7:54 PM, Daniel Smith <dbsm...@google.com> wrote: > I agree w/ Tim. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overjustification_effect# > Volunteering > > On Sat, May 27, 2017 at 5:02 PM, Joseph Jacks <jacks....@gmail.com> wrote: > >> CIL >> >> On Saturday, May 27, 2017 at 3:45:29 PM UTC-7, Tim Hockin wrote: >>> >>> On Sat, May 27, 2017 at 3:40 PM, Joseph Jacks <jack...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> > Thanks! I do hear you, Tim --- however, I find that such an experiment >>> is >>> > worthy in the face of the challenges the project has in this area. Why >>> not >>> > have both extrinsic and intrinsic, then see what happens? >>> >>> That was the point of the study. Intrinsic motivators alone ("help >>> make the world a better place") were MORE effective than combined >>> motivators ("help make the world a better place, and here's 100 bucks >>> for your effort"). >>> >> >> 21 also allows the reward to be automatically credited to a charity: >> currently, there are four choices: CoinCenter, Black Girls Code, Folding At >> Home, Code To Inspire. >> >> >>> >>> > Would love more feedback. >>> >>> Something I wanted to do but fell off my plate is to set up a kube >>> "janitors" effort. This has been pretty effective in the Linux >>> kernel, finding ways for people who didn't know the whole kernel to >>> contribute, clean up, and earn an identity ("I'm on the kernel >>> janitors team!"), and take a ton of tasks off the backlog. It needs a >>> rally point, a website, a logo, and some serious effort cataloging >>> initial work items. >>> >> >> This along with the K8sport effort share similar aims! I think what we >> are envisioning here is highly complimentary. >> >> >>> >>> >>> > On Sat, May 27, 2017 at 3:36 PM, Tim Hockin <tho...@google.com> >>> wrote: >>> >> >>> >> Curiously, I was JUST listening to a radio piece exploring the >>> effects >>> >> of intrinsic and extrinsic motivators. It is well understood that >>> >> "common purpose" and "for the greater good" (intrinsic motivators) >>> are >>> >> more effective than money and stuff (extrinsic motivators). The >>> >> interesting part was that the addition of an extrinsic motivator to a >>> >> situation which was already intrinsically motivated REDUCED the net >>> >> motivation. >>> >> >>> >> So we should be careful that applying money to our community doesn't >>> >> change it from a righteous mission into a low-paying job. >>> >> >>> >> Tim >>> >> >>> >> On Sat, May 27, 2017 at 2:36 PM, Lucas Käldström <lu...@luxaslabs.com> >>> >>> >> wrote: >>> >> > Adding kubernetes-dev and kubernetes-maintainers... >>> >> > >>> >> > On May 28 2017, at 12:31 am, Joseph Jacks <jack...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >> >> >>> >> >> https://twitter.com/kubernetesonarm/status/868577771953455105 >>> >> >> >>> >> >> Lucas and I got to DM'ing earlier and came up with this over the >>> last >>> >> >> hour. Feedback welcome! >>> >> >> >>> >> >> Doc: >>> >> >> >>> >> >> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1VQDIAB0OqiSjIHI8AWMvSdce >>> Whnz56jNpZrLs6o7NJY/edit#heading=h.en8cy6hno0c6 >>> >> > >>> >> > -- >>> >> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>> >> > Groups >>> >> > "Kubernetes user discussion and Q&A" group. >>> >> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, >>> send >>> >> > an >>> >> > email to kubernetes-use...@googlegroups.com. >>> >> > To post to this group, send email to kubernet...@googlegroups.com. >>> >> > Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/grou >>> p/kubernetes-users. >>> >> > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>> > >>> > >>> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Kubernetes user discussion and Q&A" group. >> >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to kubernetes-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> To post to this group, send email to kubernetes-users@googlegroups.com. >> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/kubernetes-users. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Kubernetes user discussion and Q&A" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to kubernetes-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to kubernetes-users@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/kubernetes-users. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
