Challenges & Open Questions

The workshops have surfaced several open questions and challenges that were discussed but not definitively answered. These open questions reflect the complexity of creating a fair, transparent, and effective reputation system that aligns with the values and goals of the community. Also, they highlight the need for ongoing dialogue, research, and experimentation as the Deep Funding reputation system is developed.

Here are some of the key open questions raised during the workshops:

• Validating Contributions: How can we build confidence in the validations of a contribution? This question addresses the need for a reliable and transparent method to assess and validate the contributions made by community members. Finding a balance between automated systems and human judgment remains a challenge​​.

• Inclusivity vs. Qualifications: Should there be some basic requirements to engage, or should the system be completely open from the start? This question explores the tension between wanting to maintain a high standard of contributions and the desire to be inclusive and accessible to newcomers​​.

• Handling Negative Reputation: How should the system manage bad reputation, especially considering the possibility that a bad reputation could follow a contributor, potentially deterring future contributions? This includes discussions on whether contributors should have the opportunity to restart or how to improve their reputation over time​​.

• Decentralization and Structure: Can the reputation system support a flat structure (horizontal hierarchy) versus a more traditional hierarchical structure? This question relates to the broader challenge of designing governance models that promote decentralization without sacrificing efficiency or clarity in decision-making​​.

• Entry Barriers for Newcomers: What are the entry barriers for newcomers to a reputation system, and how can these be minimized to ensure that the system is welcoming to new participants? This question is critical for maintaining a vibrant and growing community​​.

• Evolution of Reputation: How should the system account for the evolution of a contributor's role and the relevance of their contributions over time? This includes considering how quickly the criteria for reputation should change.

• The Balance Between Past and Present Contributions: The system's design must consider how much weight is given to past contributions versus more recent activities. There's a concern about "Not a system where the past matters most", indicating a desire for a dynamic system that can adapt to individuals' evolving roles and contributions​​.

• Addressing Unfinished Projects: The workshops discussed the issue of "Too many not completed projects funded through proposals" and how a reputation system might address or mitigate the impact of unfinished initiatives​​.