#especially if it actively promotes artists and authors of all sorts who might otherwise not get as much publicity or business

[solvicrafts]

My activity is going to be really sporadic for a while because I am going full-in on this project. I am absolutely 1000% dead-serious about Bregan D'aerthe. I am channeling my inner Jarlaxle, which just so happens to be the drow equivalent of a clown car in one half of my brain and Kimmuriel screeching "act now, you peacock!" in the other half.

I don't want to just build a website, I want to build a community resource. I want to create something that gives everybody a chance to be seen and heard. I want to promote new and lesser known authors and artists and their projects. I want to create a public resource for all things drow that actually keeps up with the times and is actually accurate and helpful to the fandom.

And also

I really want a Bregan D'aerthe company email. And an ID badge. And a lanyard. And business cards. And a pony and--

[queeryourgame]

Community Values, Guidelines & Rule Enforcement

Community Values

Queer Your Game is an international multi-game LGBTQIA+ only gayming community. We aim to provide our Gaymers with a protected cross-platform environment where we can all enjoy ourselves, meet new gay™ people from all over the world and gayme together safely. Queer Your Game welcomes all sorts of Gaymers regardless of gender, race, religion, nationality or level of skill. 

Our community is live on Discord and you can join us today!

We expect everyone to behave responsibly, kindly and respectfully toward one another across all platforms and games.

The following guidelines are not exhaustive and we reserve the right to change and amend them as our community grows and we learn. We’ll let you know when we do, but we expect all of you to read them, accept them and abide by them.

One last thing, safety is our main concern and to that end, we are offering a moderated space.

You are the heart of this community. The way you behave is the way we all behave and your integrity is our integrity. If you see someone that needs help, if you witness something that’s against our guidelines or just plain wrong, say something. Do something. Tell a mod, alert us on social media, stand up for your fellow Gaymer as you would like your fellow Gaymer to stand up for you and help.

Join Queer Your Game 👉 http://bit.ly/QYGDiscord 

Community Guidelines

Queer Your Game is an LGBTQIA+ only community. What does that mean? Well, it means that if you are cisheteroromantic AND cisheterosexual then you can’t be part of this community. We appreciate that you consider yourself one of our cishet allies and we understand that you might have a spouse/partner, family members, friends and acquaintances who are LGBTQIA+ that you care about and support. However, due to the nature of the gaming community at large, we wish to keep QYG open to LGBTQIA+ folks only. PS: If you are cisAromantic and/or cisAssexual and you consider yourself Queer, we welcome you.

Our community guidelines must be respected cross-platforms. You must also abide by the community guidelines and terms of services of the platforms you are using. On Discord, you must respect Discord’s guidelines, on Twitter, you must respect Twitter’s guidelines, on Xbox, you must respect Xbox’s guidelines, etc.

Queer Your Game is not yet a corporation but we will abide by the Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA), the European Union Copyright Law (EUCL), the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), the World Intellectual Property Organization Copyright Treaty (WIPO and WCT) and the World Trade Organization (WCT) on copyright and intellectual property. If the copyright and IP organization of your region isn’t mentioned here, please know that if we are contacted by them regarding copyright and intellectual property transgressions by our users, we will consider their inquiries just as seriously as those from the organizations mentioned above.

While we are on the subject of copyright and intellectual property, it’s important you remember that we consider fanart and derivative work to be fair use. Fair use is a right, don’t let anyone else tell you otherwise. Using culture to express yourself and create your own representation is something that we at Queer Your Game actively encourage.

Reposting original art, derivative work, and fanart as your own without crediting the artist or appropriating art, derivative work, and fanart is forbidden. If we find out that you are stealing original art, derivative work, and fanart from the artists in our community—whether from Discord, Tumblr, Twitter, or anywhere else our users are present—for commercial purposes, you will be reported to said platforms, to the relevant authorities, and you will be immediately banned from Queer Your Game. Forever.

The sharing and/or promoting of illegal activities and illegal materials, like piracy, copyright and intellectual property infringement, betting and gambling, pornography, pornography involving children/animals/violence, political parties, etc. are forbidden in our community cross-platforms.

Please don’t use the community Discord and other platforms for your advertisement of any kind, unless you are affiliated with Queer Your Game and/or we have given you permission to do so. Yes, that includes charities and fandom projects. Do not ever ask for money or promote your Ko-fi, your Patreon, your PayPal, your Kickstarter, your IndieGoGo, etc. unless you are affiliated with Queer Your Game and we have given you permission to do so.

Remember when we said that your safety is our main concern at Queer Your Game? That starts with keeping your personal information secret. Do not ever share your personal information in our Discord Server or publically on our other platforms. If you want to share your personal information with a fellow Gaymer, add them as a friend and share what you wish to share via private direct messages.

Nobody at Queer Your Game, Admins or Mods, will ever ask you for your personal information in our Discord server—unless you are in the SOS channel and you are requiring immediate IRL assistance, and we do mean life or death situations.

If you are caught sharing another Gaymer’s personal information, you will be banned. If you obtained that information illegally, we will report you to the authorities in your country of residence.

To become a part of our gayming community you need to follow our application process. We do not allow Gaymers to have multiple accounts—especially if you have been kicked or banned and you’re trying to trick us into adding you again. Don’t do it.

If we catch you impersonating another Gaymer, you will be banned and reported.

By the way, don’t use offensive usernames. By offensive we mean insulting, discriminatory, violent, sexual, etc.. Oh and don’t copy another Gaymer’s username either.

We are running an 18 and older Discord server and we don’t mind you discussing all sorts of topics, including sex. I mean, we’re gay. It’s okay. Just don’t be inappropriate. Don’t link to porn, under 18 content, illegal content, or you know, all the stuff we already mentioned above. Don’t upload under 18 or NSFW content in the chat, don’t use porn/violent/discriminative GIFs, don’t swear like a sailor, don’t spam.

Using our community Discord for sexual acts or intercourse, the promotion of sexual services and the exploitation of children is prohibited.

We will have zero tolerance for Gaymers who bully, harass, verbally abuse or berate other Gaymers in-game, on Discord or any other platforms Queer Your Game is on. Hate speech is not okay. Do not promote violence against anyone, especially other marginalized folks. If we catch you bashing on someone, alone or in a group, you’re done.  

If you have a disagreement with someone or you’re getting upset and you feel like lashing out, find a Mod, take a break. If you can’t manage what’s going on in the moment, walk away, send us an email or DM us. Criticism should always be polite and constructive. In fact, one of the mottos we use in every aspect of our work at Queer Your Game is “To be a voice of criticism, be a force of proposition.” It’s good advice; you’re welcome.

Trolling in-game, on Discord and other platforms Queer Your Game is on is unacceptable. Don’t ruin the experience of other people. That goes for spoiling. Whether it’s about a game, a movie, a book, a tv show, just don’t spoil, okay? Now, we know some of you will want to talk about every bit of spoiler and juicy news out there so we made you a channel on Discord.

In-game, we expect you to show fair play, to win with dignity and lose with grace, and to support your fellow Gaymers and teammates. Cheating and hacking are prohibited. Respect in-game rules and codes of conduct. No friendly kills, no awoxing, no spawn killing, no stealing from other Gaymers, no destroying other Gaymers property. Oh and no botting.

Raging is a no-go. Don’t rage quit, don’t yell at your fellow Gaymers, don’t insult people, don’t swear excessively, etc.. If you can’t handle what’s going on in-game, if you know you’re going to lose it, walk away. It’s that simple.

Cooperation and support are promoted within Queer Your Game. We like transparency and we think that champions, raid leaders and more skilled Gaymers should lead and help and teach and theorycraft and strategize and all the good things that can advance their fellow Gaymers, their own teams, parties and guilds of Gaymers. Just don’t go around sharing all of that on social media unless it’s made clear that it’s okay or you’re the person who came up with it.

At Queer Your Game we consider ourselves proponents of social justice and equal rights. We also know what a lot of social media platforms and communities refuse to acknowledge: tech and media are not neutral and no community or person is apolitical. While we encourage conversation and we understand that nobody’s perfect and no content is unproblematic, we want everyone to have the opportunity to enjoy the diversity of our community as they have fun, share, learn, educate themselves and grow. We expect all Gaymers to be on their best behavior. If you witness any of the following behaviors, report it to a Mod.

Racism, anti-blackness, xenophobia, white supremacy, Islamophobia, antisemitism, cultural appropriation, and bigotry will not be tolerated.

If you’re a transphobe or a TERF, don’t apply. We don’t want you. We also expect Gaymers to respect their fellow Gaymers’ pronouns. Misgendering will be sanctioned.

Sexism and misogyny won’t be tolerated. If you’re a white feminist, we don’t like you either. And if you don’t know what that is, we encourage you to check Google.

Ableism, food-shaming, fat-shaming, and all physical discrimination or belittling are rude and forbidden.

Don’t police, gatekeep, etc.. We have Mods and Admins, and we have guidelines. Your judgment of others is not required nor welcome.

Threats, incitation to violence and self-destroying behaviors, and any activity or conversation that could lead to your physical or emotional harm are completely forbidden and will get a Gaymer banned.

Suicide stunts or self-harm for attention-seeking, entertainment, or bad jokes will be sanctioned.

We have created an SOS text chat and voice channel on our Discord. Our intention is to provide a safe space for any Gaymer who would find themselves in a sudden and terrible struggle. If you are in danger, if you are in crisis, if you are experiencing a medical or mental health emergency, etc., anything that would require immediate assistance, you can, if you choose to, go into the SOS text and voice channels.

We want to make it clear that, even though our Moderators are notified that if they are alerted or see a Gaymer in an SOS channel, they should immediately check on them, we cannot shoulder the responsibility of your well being and your safety. We will not offer professional and trained support even if some of our Moderators and Admins could be trained professionals. For now, we can only provide you with a safe space and common sense help if we are able. We will call the police or an ambulance if you need them and we happen to be able to. We will stay with you if you require a presence. We will help provide you with crisis helpline phone numbers if they’re available where you reside so you can seek the appropriate help.

Please don’t abuse the SOS channels. We cannot stress enough that this specific gesture is a way for Queer Your Game to show you in action that we care. We are not in any position to be responsible for your safety and/or your well being and we do not make any promises of trained support or life-altering actions. Therefore Queer Your Game—as private individuals or as a corporation—is not liable for you.

Rule Enforcement 

Queer Your Game is a moderated space, on Discord, on Social Media, in forums, and in-game. We have Moderators, Admins, and Super Admins.

As a moderated space and community, Queer Your Game does, in fact, exercise a certain censure as described in our community guidelines. We reserve the right to change them, although we will let you know when that happens.

The appreciation of your violations and of your behaviors remain up to the discretion of our Mods, Admins and Super Admins. You can appeal a sanction, a temporary kick or ban, a definitive ban, etc. by emailing us at community@queeryourgame.com. The decision to maintain, alter or lift your sanction(s) is also to the discretion of our Mods, Admins and Super Admins.

The offense system is as follows:

You can get warnings of different gravity in-game, in Discord chat or voice channels, in your mentions and in your DMs or PMs depending on the platform you commit your offense on.

If warnings don’t have an immediate impact on your behavior, you can be asked to a private conversation with a Mod, an Admin or a Super Admin on Discord.

A small offense will get you an email, a DM or a PM, possibly a temporary time out or kick, most likely a private scolding and a mark on your account.

A serious offense will get you the same treatment as a small offense, a definite scolding, a kick or ban for the length we deem fit, and you will lose your status in the community. When you come back, you will have to go through a return interview and you will start fresh as a Padawan Gaymer on probation.

A grave offense will mean your immediate kick from our Discord and a ban will be decided by our team of Mods, Admins, and Super Admins. You’ll receive an email informing you of your ban and our definitive decision.

We may ask for your opinions, thoughts, and ideas in polls and voting events.

We at Queer Your Game think strongly about the ethics of our project. We believe in transparency and in taking in different perspectives. To that end, we regularly consult with outside professionals in different fields and we are in the process of recruiting different individuals for our reference and sensitivity group.

Join Queer Your Game 👉 http://bit.ly/QYGDiscord

[comicteaparty]

February 5th-February 11th, 2020 Reader Favorites Archive

The archive for the Reader Favorites chat that occurred from February 5th, 2020 to February 11th, 2020.  The chat focused on the following question: 

How does knowing or not knowing a webcomic’s creator(s) personally affect when you read, how you read, and similar? 

carcarchu

It actually affects my impression of their work because there's this one webcomic that I really like but I find some of the things the artist has done in the past to be unsavoury. I don't want to hold it against that artist because I want to believe that they are able to grow and apologize for their mistakes (although they never actually did apologize for what they did as far as I know) but every time I read their comic there's always this nagging thought at the back of my head about what they did and it really limits my enjoyment of their comic which is otherwise amazing(edited)

Capitania do Azar

I read a lot of comics first, and only after I go look for their authors. So in that regard, no. Most of the times I get to know the author it doesn't affect me much, but I can't say it never happened (but it was mostly if the personality traits I disliked actually managed to bleed into the comic, tho I understand that I am more prone to noticing them in the comic after noticing them in the person)

Deo101 [Millennium]

For the most part, I only start reading a comic once I get to know someone and like them. Its a way I show them I support them and their work, and oftentimes it really helps me enjoy it way more than I otherwise would.

I'm kind of already invested, and I have a baseline understanding of what they're doing before I start, which helps me a lot because I have a hard time understanding things, personally.

DanitheCarutor

Usually I don't really care? I don't connect the creator with their work in the sense that they're technically two separate entities, and while one can't be possible without the other, whatever type of personality the creator has doesn't affect my reading experience because I don't really care about the creator as a person... as cold as that sounds. There are some exceptions. If a creator acts super comfortable with me, I'll feel more comfortable with them and be more into promoting pretty much everything of theirs, I'll probably also like their content more because of the interaction. If they treat me like crap, like actually being abusive, then I'll be soured to consuming their work. I attempt to have this apply to generally awful people too, like sexual predators, abusers, peadophiles, etc. Although I admit I'm a weak bitch for (these not webcomic related) artists like Michael Jackson, Frank Sinatra, Caravaggio (a late 1500's Italian painter who was also a convicted murderer), H.P Lovecraft and Carlo Gesualdo (a 16th century composer who was also a murderer). It really sucks because there are a lot of works out there that are really good, in my opinion, created by less than great people. I may as well deprive myself of most art to avoid morally reprehensible, or potentially morally reprehensible people.(edited)

But to get back on topic! Yeah, no, I don't really care about what type of personality you have. Whether it's salty or sweet, we're flawed people and it's dumb to expect webcomic creators to act like examples of human perfection, or be role models for everyone. At least in my very bias opinion... as someone who gets a lot of crap for having a blunt, non-sugary personality.

NOT saying people who's reading experience is affected by certain personalities are dumb! I just find it dumb for me personally, other people can do whatever they want. (I can't English this morning.)(edited)

Capitania do Azar

Caravaggio stans in the house

RebelVampire

This is a tricky question for me that comes in many layers. I don't really need to know a creator to want to read their work. So not knowing them rarely has any effect for me. If I think the work is good, I'll generally read regularly. Though it makes me less likely to comment, that doesn't change whether I think the work is good or not or my enjoyment of it. But then there is knowing the creator, which is a messy topic for me that is kind of a double edged sword. On the one hand, knowing the creator may make me more likely to comment, chat, and engage with the work as I read it - especially if I find the creator to be laid back and happy to let readers have fun with their content. I am also generally more inspired to re-read and analyze the work much more deeply than I would during a normal read too. Even if I don't think the work is that good, knowing the creator can make a difference for me in that realm too. Especially if I think the creator is super nice and overall a pleasant person, I will read their comic to support them and show appreciation for their work. But on the other other hand, there have been a few instances where I've been turned off from reading something because of knowing the creator. Which make no mistake - I wholeheartedly believe in separation of creator and their work. So for me, if a work is good and doesn't promote the same sort of stuff I disliked the creator for, then I'll probably still read it. However, if I don't think the work is good in the first place, and I find the creator to just be too toxic, I do admittedly stop reading it completely, if only just to avoid the creator at all costs.(edited)

DanitheCarutor

@Capitania do Azar

Capitania do Azar

@DanitheCarutor

BadSprite

I'm usually really attentive towards the comics my friends make. Since I talk to them on a more regular basis, it's easier for me to remember to keep up reading. That aside, I really don't look into the author when reading a comic I usually let the content speak for itself.

Cronaj (Whispers of the Past)

Knowing the creator doesn't typically affect my reading habits, unless I was sort of on the fence about continuing to read their work in the first place. So if the comic is meh... and I found out that the creator is not so great either, I will likely drop the comic. But on the other hand, if the creator is really honest and open with their audience, and generally kind, I can forgive a lot of their artistic mistakes. I will say though that with comics that I am really engaged in, I usually seek out the artist's social media to learn more about them. And the more I learn about them usually only makes me more involved in engaging.

kayotics

I don’t HAVE to know the author to read the comic, but knowing them does change my reaction to their comic. I have a lot of friends who are authors, and I’m more likely to read their comics when I probably wouldn’t have found them otherwise. On the other hand when I’m reading a comic and something happens that makes me like them as a person less, it’s harder for me to enjoy the comic, and I usually end up dropping it. Overall, I prefer to not learn more about authors of comics that I’m already invested in.

Ranger

I don't personally know any other creators, so usually I take the comic alone, but sometimes the creator turns out to be more interesting than the comic. penny-arcade.com is one like that, for me, I don't regularly read anymore but I follow the miniature-painting that they do, still. Someone mentioned hoping that comic creators learn and apologize, and that has been the case for that particular comic, as well, they've done some stupid stuff and apologized for it, and hopefully grown from it. It would seem to me that if you have an active social media presence you're going to eventually make a stupid mistake, so I hope if it ever happens to me I can apologize and change, as well.

Eightfish (Puppeteer)

Don't know any comic creators irl. But even just talking about people on this server I'm definitely more invested in Phantomarine and Ingress than I otherwise would be because I've seen the authors on this discord and others. Also some comics I've found through other discords or forums. I would still be reading the comics otherwise, but maybe not following week-by-week. There are also many other comics from people here that I've checked out and found to be not my cup of tea, but I read way more of them than I otherwise would have. Maybe in an ideal world we wouldn't be affected by our opinions of the authors, but I can't help it. Anyways, one of the most unique things about webcomics is our ability to talk to comic authors and readers directly.

Question to other comic creators here: Do you think that your own social media presence is one that makes people like your comic more?(edited)

Cronaj (Whispers of the Past)

I don't know if it has made my readers like my comic more. In fact, very few of my readers actually follow my social media accounts. That being said, I think social media has gotten me a few new readers.

It's more of an audience growth thing than a discussion about my comic

I wish readers would discuss my comic outside of the comment section more, haha

LadyLazuli (Phantomarine)

If I find a comic I like, I often want more of its 'side content' - and I often get that side content by finding and following the creator and seeing other things they do or like. So many times, the webcomics we create are little windows into ourselves - things we like, hold dear, hold to be important, want to say, etc. So seeing the creator just be themselves, it's almost like I'm getting more of the flavor of the webcomic, but under a different light. And it does keep me much more engaged if I know them and they know me. I think a healthy social media presence can absolutely help build an audience - I'm lucky that all of my comic's 'fans' (that still sounds yucky to say, blech!) have become my friends in some way. I've often thought my work is like a friend trap - if people like my comic, and my comic is an extension of myself, they might like me too. So we end up befriending each other anyway

Deo101 [Millennium]

That kind of "friend trap" idea is how I feel about it too hehe

Ranger

I get way more traffic on my website for my comic than I have followers, so I guess it probably is more that my media funnels to my comic than my comic to the media.

DanitheCarutor

Eeeh Unless it's comic related I'm not much for small talk, or openly letting people know what kind of person I am. I'll talk about my interests, and some mental health stuff because I know being open about that is important, but that's it. Personally I would rather readers 100% focus on my comic without noticing me.

Cap’n Lee (Flowerlark Studios)

If a friend of mine makes a comic, I want to read it, even if it’s a genre I really don’t like. It helps me understand them better, because I know I personally express a lot of myself through my comics. I’m not a very open or trusting person, so I will express things through my art that I won’t otherwise talk about, and I think it can be the same for other people, as well. Apart from friends, I really do like getting to know the creators of comics I like. I like when they share a bit about themselves under the comic updates, even if it’s not about the drama of their life; just talking about little things like movies they watched or a book they enjoyed. I like to know there’s a person behind the art, and I often feel less engaged by comics if the creator stays detached and never writes blogs or participates in the comments. I want to get to know them at least a little, and I love when a creator is willing to have conversations with their readers. So overall, my engagement is very much affected by whether I know an artist personally. I’m more likely to read and continue following if it’s someone I interact with, and much more willing to try comics outside of my interests.(edited)

As for whether my enjoyment of a work is affected by a creator’s behaviour.... I have to say it 100% is. I wish I could separate artist from creation, but I have a really hard time with that. My ‘guilt by association’ reflex is very strong, and a negative experience with the authors makes me feel unsettled or outright distressed whenever I see their work. A really good example was one of my favourite comics way back in ‘the early days’ of webcomics. I won’t name any names, but there was a comic I absolutely loved. It was fantastically written, had imaginative and very well thought-out world-building and had so many good messages of love, bravery, and acceptance in it. I followed it for years, always eagerly anticipating the next page. Seeing a new page posted could literally make my whole day. Well, one year the author overhauled his website, and there was a new chat room attached to it. One day I ventured into the chat, only to find it filled with political vitriol. The author spent his whole time insulting and slinging mud at people on the other side of his political alignment. I was shocked and dismayed that someone who had such a wholesome comic could behave this way (just for the record, I have plenty of friends who have both the same and complete opposite political views as me. I don’t hate people for their political alignments, but I can’t stand when anyone hurls insults at people who believe differently than they do). It completely ruined one of my favourite comics. Every time I read a page where the characters expressed love or joy or acceptance, those vitriolic insults I’d seen the author write floated up into my head. All I could think about was how much hatred he was filled with. How much he hated people like me. The whole message of the comic, which had felt like a beacon of light to me for years, now felt like a lie. I couldn’t read it anymore.(edited)

Eightfish (Puppeteer)

That sucks, Cap. I can never understand how situations like that occur, where the author is so different from their work. Especially because I think of my comic as being very reflective of myself, like I'm sure many others here do. I wonder if in situations like that it is just me interpreting the work more charitably than it deserves, or if the author intentionally writes with a different voice? Or maybe it's a kind of doublethink, where people don't think to apply their morals to themselves?

Cap’n Lee (Flowerlark Studios)

I’m the same, My comics are very much an expression of myself, and written as a way to process some of the things I’m dealing with. I’ve the feeling in this case it was the latter; that the author honestly believed his messages, but was not self-aware enough to realise his behaviour was completely contrary to what he was writing. It was unfortunate and a great deal of why I felt like his comic was now a lie. That someone could sincerely believe they were loving and accepting while also spewing hatred at people different from them was too much cognitive dissonance for me to deal with.(edited)

Eightfish (Puppeteer)

I wonder how he would have reacted if someone called him out on it?

Probably poorly(edited)

DanitheCarutor

It might be a sort of escapism thing. There are some psychology groups out there that discuss the subject of relating depression with comedy, and how extremely troubled individuals like Robin Williams or Richard Jeni were comedians. I don't remember who it was, because I saw the video a long time ago, but I vaguely remember a stand-up comedian talking about how they love making people laugh to offset how bad their life was or how bad they felt. Something along those lines. Maybe it's something similar with storytellers/writers. I've actually seen a lot of cases where what a person's writing or drawings are the polar opposite to their outlook on life or their personality, and follow some artists who say they like the escapism/catharsis of it. Like, maybe the person was making a comic about being a person they wished they were, or a life they wished they had. Although I might just be looking too deep into it, and the author is just a douchebag hypocrite.

But yeah, I may not be able to relate since I'm so... me, but that does suck, and I can understand how you would be affected by an experience like that.

Cronaj (Whispers of the Past)

It's definitely pretty hard to stay engaged in a story when the author so egregiously opposes my core beliefs. This happened to me after I read a novel I enjoyed, and then I found out that the author was a homophobic jerk. Left a sour taste in my mouth whenever I thought about how much I had enjoyed their book.

Eightfish (Puppeteer)

Could it have been Orson Scott Card? Think he's the most infamous for that kind of thing

Cronaj (Whispers of the Past)

Omg

Yes

I wasn't gonna mention names

But yes

Eightfish (Puppeteer)

eh when people get to that level of fame I think it's okay

Like saying how JK Rowling likes TERF stuff on twitter(edited)

Cronaj (Whispers of the Past)

Yeah....

Eightfish (Puppeteer)

she's big enough that journalists have reported on her already

Cap’n Lee (Flowerlark Studios)

I won’t name names as to who this webcomicker was because I don’t like throwing others under the bus.

Cronaj (Whispers of the Past)

Authors shooting themselves in the foot tbh

Cap’n Lee (Flowerlark Studios)

But yeah, I can’t read HP anymore bc JKR is a TERF. Which is a shame bc I was a HUGE HP fan for many years. I was one of the ‘liked it before it was cool’ kids. Now... it definitely leaves a bad taste in my mouth when I try to read the books.(edited)

It’s always heartbreaking when I discover that a creator who made something I love and connected with despises my entire existence.

Eightfish (Puppeteer)

But yeah I liked Ender's Game as well. Read some of his other books too, but those were more reflective of his personal opinions, I think. In his case I feel like his religion and strict ideas about family affect his public opinions, but maybe he writes books with how he subconsiously thinks an ideal world is? For JK Rowling maybe it wasn't a coincidence her most evil character was also the one that modified his body the most.

Cap’n Lee (Flowerlark Studios)

I think one of the few exceptions of ‘hate the creator’s public behaviour but love the creation’ for me is Hideki Kamiya. The guy is an absolute asshole, but I don’t think anything could stop me from loving the game Ōkami. Although games being a huge group effort helps, as he wasn’t solely responsible for bringing it to life.(edited)

Eightfish (Puppeteer)

I also don't think OSC's books are unaffected by his opinion. Don't know how far you got in the series, Cronaj, but if you read Speaker for the Dead it was very weird and jarring how Ender meets this single mother and fixes her whole dysfunctional family by being a male influence and then randomly marries her and adopts her children even though they have practically no chemistry. It was like OSC was forcing his idea about everyone only being able to find true happiness through raising a family into the book.

Don't know anything about Hideki Kamiya, but can sort of relate. Rurouni Kenshin's author was arrested for possession of child porn but I still love that series : (

Cap’n Lee (Flowerlark Studios)

OH NO, WHAT?? I... did not know that. Rurouni Kenshin is one of my old favourites. :C(edited)

Eightfish (Puppeteer)

https://www.crunchyroll.com/anime-news/2017/11/21-1/rurouni-kenshin-manga-author-charged-with-possession-of-child-pornography

Cap’n Lee (Flowerlark Studios)

Uuuugh.

Eightfish (Puppeteer)

I read it as a kid and I'm still nostalgic for it. One of the only manga I've seen where a fighting character actually gets permanently injured from his battles.

And gets weaker over time

Cronaj (Whispers of the Past)

@Eightfish (Puppeteer) I only read Enchantment, which I thought had some cool historical world-building in it, but after finding out about OSC's beliefs, it made it really hard for me to continue reading his work. I used to be Mormon growing up, but obviously Mormon honphobia and sexism (among other things) left me unsettled, and I left the church. So yeah, pretty hard for me to forgive someone in that situation.

Eightfish (Puppeteer)

It can be hard to break away from a culture you've grown up in. I used to be in a homophobic church/family as well, and really believed what they were saying. I just didn't think about it, because kids tend to accept what their parents say unquestioningly. Of course, unlike OSC I got over that stuff when I was in middle school. And my internalized homophobia ended up hurting me more than anyone else :'DD

Deo101 [Millennium]

I was also someone who was raised in... unsavory ways. I did definitely hurt some people before I started to see how wrong I was, and I dont expect the people i hurt to ever forgive me. But, I have grown and I want to be better. So, I don't try to assume people can never grow, but it's sad when it does seem like they have no interest in it and it's been pointed out to them many times.

Eightfish (Puppeteer)

Church is weird, guys. Even though I'm not religious now, when I go back I almost want to believe. Holy spaces and big groups hijack our psychology and it can be hard to break free if you're immersed enough in the culture or have a lot to lose.

Deo101 [Millennium]

it's an interesting kind of peer pressure.

I don't know though, I don't like to fault people for having beliefs and i dont think it will inherently make them a bad person.

Eightfish (Puppeteer)

Yeah, I remember telling this kid in middle school that I didn't think gay marriage should be legal. Then in high school I found out he was gay. So that sucks. But he's more successful than me now, so I guess he won in the end

Deo101 [Millennium]

I think there are some institutionalized issues with churches at large, but it's not inherent that someone who is religious will be bigoted so I don't like to lump religion and bigotry together

Eightfish (Puppeteer)

Not everything about you can be blamed on your surroundings though. With the internet as it is anyone can change if they want to.

Agree with that thing about religion and bigotry, I know lovely religious people and churches. I just associate the two because of my own experiences

Cronaj (Whispers of the Past)

To clarify, I don't think that being religious or being Mormon makes you a bad person. I have met many people, religious or not that are good. And I have also met many people who are reprehensible irrespective of religion or secularism. Your religion does not define you as a person. There is more to you than what is written in religious texts or talked about on holy days. I know a woman who is bisexual AND a member of the Mormon church, and she is constantly fighting bigotry and trying to find acceptance, but being Mormon is only a small part of the bigger picture. So I don't like OSC because he is a bigot. Not because he is Mormon. Anyway, we're getting a bit off-topic, guys

sssfrs (JOE IS DEAD)

On the other end of this I feel like I need to keep my own political views and all kinds of personal baggage hidden in case of readers being turned off because they disagree with me on something

I try to keep the stuff I say “on brand” with the political messages of the work

Eightfish (Puppeteer)

I said my comic is a reflection of myself, but it's also a very edited and thought out and proofread version of myself. If all my readers read my forum posts or random crap I say on discord, would they find me obnoxious?

I especially feel this when I'm trying to promote my comic

so I don't really do that anymore...

DanitheCarutor

@sssfrs (JOE IS DEAD) Hahah yeah, that's another one of the reasons why I prefer to keep to myself. I've never had a good personality, and I have a lot of shit going on in my life, I don't want to ruin a good thing by being open with readers. (at least no more than what I've already done in my time on the internet.) Also people on the internet are super judgey, make the slightest mistake or have an opinion that the right person doesn't agree with, and your ass can get slaughtered!

Cap’n Lee (Flowerlark Studios)

More on topic: Yeah, I generally do keep my opinions about hot-button topics to myself in my online life. I don’t discuss politics or religion or my strong opinions on very controversial issues. Part of it is those issues tend to attract trolls. Part of it is that I hate confrontation. Part of it is making the experience of reading my comic as pleasant as possible for readers by not turning my site or my social media accounts into battlegrounds. I have very obvious views about tolerance and acceptance that isn’t hard to parse by reading my comics. My characters themselves can be very opinionated, but under pages where they express harsher, more close-minded views, I put disclaimers underneath that say my characters don’t always express my own beliefs because they are written to be complicated, flawed people who sometimes have intolerant opinions. This recent page of Ashes was probably a good example: (https://www.flowerlarkstudios.com/comic/chapter-9-a-twisted-reflection/page-09-04/). While I write the messages I believe in, my characters don’t always behave in a way I condone, because my comics acknowledge how messy people are.(edited)

sssfrs (JOE IS DEAD)

My comic is going to have a strong message on imperialism and nationalism

DanitheCarutor

@Cap’n Lee (Flowerlark Studios) Man, about having character you don't agree with, I've been feeling that so much! Since the first chapter! I don't agree with how any of my characters are handling the situations in their lives, but they're supposed to be people, with flaws and all that junk. Although in the end the story is supposed to kinda be about learning healthy ways to cope with stuff, and learning to love yourself... or at least tolerate yourself. So I gueeeess the characters have to suck at life first in order to get better at it later. :/ I admit to sometimes taking an open, more lighthearted, jab at religion but usually with other like-minded people. Also I just love talking about the christian cult church my mom grew up it and I partially grew up in as an "outsider", it's so fascinating and so very much a legit cult.

snuffysam (Super Galaxy Knights)

I'm definitely more likely to jump into a comic if it's being written by someone I like vs someone I know nothing about (or worse, someone I dislike). Like I'll often see a commenter on my comic and go "huh, you seem like a cool person, I should check out your comic". Sometimes it's not my cup of tea, but usually it works out well (: . Given that I usually encounter new comics through forums & chats and stuff... It's honestly kind of hard not to get at least some impression of a creator before reading a comic? Unless it's a comic from #ctp_bookclub written by a creator who's never been on the server. It's odd... in the webcomic space at least, I don't think I've ever encountered "love the work, hate the creator". Like if there's some creator who's loudly proclaiming something I really disagree with, more often than not their comic is an obvious mouthpiece for the position they take in public. Though I generally try not to click on comics of people I dislike unless I get overcome with morbid curiosity. I'm not sure I'd say my comic matches with who I am publicly, but it matches with who I want to be? Like my comic has a lot of themes of learning to know thyself, figuring out how to handle your emotions, and most relevantly to me learning to have a positive image of yourself.

renieplayerone

I think im absolutely more likely to at least once over someone's comic if I know them in real life, even if its not necessarily a genre im into, but this mostly applies to closer friends. On the internet, however, i am absolutely more likely to read the works of people i follow simply because i get the update reminders. I also am more likely to read comics i see the update notifications for on twitter or instagram in general. Fanart i try to limit to people i know and who at least cursorily know me, just because for me i find fanart a personal thing if it comes from me (although all fanart i receive is welcome and makes me cry haha)

Shadowmark Productions

When a person is growing up there are certain impressions made upon them in terms of beliefs and opinions. When these attitudes are impressed upon you before you can speak, these are called pre-linguistic beliefs and they’re extremely, extremely difficult to shake. The reason being that they are instilled in you before you can reason. Speech is the ability to reason. They are beliefs that stem from a place that is intuitive and instinctual rather that logical. That’s why when you question bigots and such most tend to speak in terms of feelings, or they talk about right and wrong but with no logical argument to buttress those opinions.

keii4ii

My tastes are so narrow and specific, that I can't make myself read someone's comic just because I like them as a person/friend. I also feel uncomfortable about the other way around: I would not want someone to read my comic just because they like me. (Checking it out is one thing; making themselves read it even after they go 'oh, this isn't my bag of tea' is a different story...!) The thought of someone reading my comic as a personal favor despite not really enjoying it... Even if they're not expecting anything in return (they often do, but not always), it honestly makes my soul shrivel. Of course, if they like both me AND my comic, then that's awesome! I did have one experience where I came to appreciate someone's works on a new level, after coming to know them IRL. I always liked their stuff a lot. It's just there were some Things about their work that I couldn't personally connect to. But after seeing them in person, seeing how passionate they were 24/7 (my other artist friends met them too, and they all agreed this person's passion was on a new level), it helped me see what those Things meant to them, why and how those Things excited them. I came to develop a deep respect for this creator, as well as an acquired taste for those Things that I previously was not into.(edited)

DanitheCarutor

@keii4ii Even though your reasoning is different, it's nice to know I'm not the only one who detaches the creator from their work. Also I didn't think about the whole reading something just because you like the person, yeah, that is really uncomfortable! 100% I would rather someone just read my comic because they like the comic, not force themselves to check it out just because they think I'm a nice person... especially since my comic can be such a hard read for some people.

meek

Definitely knowing the creator or knowing about a creator influences how I perceive their webcomic and how much I read it, talk about it, engage with it, etc. I have several friends who make comics and I put their comics at the top of my priority list to read, and being so busy all of the time, my friends' works comprise most of what I read. And then from there it goes from whoever I remembered or whoever I liked or what kind of comic I'm feeling at the moment or so on. I do think, reading through some of the other comments (and sorry in advance for being discourse-y/that guy), but there's a vagueness I can't quite get behind when it comes to "separate the art from the artist." There's definitely levels and nuances where the creator's personality or behavior outside their work cannot be ignored and with art being so personal, I don't see how you could ever 100% separate a creator from their work because they put themselves in every word they type, every line they draw. But like I said, there are levels. If I find a creator mildly unpleasant or annoying but not truly malicious or offensive (e.g. being generally abrasive or rude), then I'll roll my eyes and probably leave their comic to read for another day. But if it gets more than that, then I don't want to support them in any way with my views. Like, if I know someone has bullied before/still bullies people in the present, I can't ignore that because their comic is cute. Knowing a person's character really flavors any interactions, direct or indirect, for me and it's something where I can't look past that, especially if it's an ongoing recurring thing.

but uhh to answer the question more directly: I like knowing webcomic creators. I find it easier to get more invested in a story if you can see behind the scenes, see them talk about their characters, their influences, see them have fun and the love that they have for their work. Even if it's just a very shallow, one-sided, "I'm just following their twitter"- I think it's good to know creators a little bit. But knowing them Too Much can also negatively impact my opinion of them and their work, so I dunno.

[dippedanddripped]

As retailers are finding it increasingly difficult to get shoppers (particularly new, young ones) into their brick-and-mortar stores, a slew of luxury brands seem to have a strategy for engaging consumers: Get them to go somewhere else — not to shop, but to hang out.

This summer, Dolce & Gabbana opened a "cultural hub," as it's calling it, on Mercer St. in Soho, New York. While one can shop there during the day, the space is first and foremost a luxurious, Instagrammable clubhouse for the youths. It hosts monthly events, like a concert featuring up-and-coming bands, or a "drink and draw" night.

Also this summer, Coach debuted Life Coach, an experiential pop-up in New York meant to "lead guests on a journey of self-discovery." It contained exactly zero products for sale; instead, it housed immersive and photogenic rooms. Perhaps you saw one made to look like a New York City subway station, where guests could graffiti the walls, on your social media feeds; there was also a Coney Island-inspired room with games and a mystical forest with tarot card readings.

Over the past few months, Hermès, the most exclusive and luxurious of all exclusive, luxurious brands, opened "Carré Club" (carré means "scarf") pop-ups in New York, Toronto, Singapore, Los Angeles and Milan. With free public admission, guests could get photos taken, sing karaoke (sorry, Carré-Ok), enjoy complimentary refreshments from a café and watch artists and designers work in an on-set atelier. Scarves were available to purchase, but they were in no way the main focus of the event.

A guest at Dolce & Gabbana Mercer St. Photo: Courtesy of Dolce & Gabbana

In September in London, Matchesfashion.com opened 5 Carlos Place, a Mayfair townhouse with a retail component that most notably serves as a community space where all sorts of event programming has and will take place, as well as live streaming and podcasts for those who can't visit it in person — think high-level events like book signings, panel discussions, supper clubs, luxury brand installations and intimate musical performances. The opening follows a series of temporary residencies the retailer held in cities like New York, Los Angeles, Paris and Hong Kong for its 30th anniversary featuring similar types of engaging, often-educational events.

Chances are, you've seen at least one of these activations on Instagram, but aside from their photogenic designs, they all have one major (and initially surprising) thing in common: Unlike the many ephemeral retail concepts that came before them, the main goal here is not to sell you stuff. These brands are investing in physical spaces and events without any expectation that they will see a return on that investment — at least not a return that can be measured in dollars.

This concept didn't exactly come out of nowhere. There was February’s Chanel Beauty House in LA featuring room after room of Instagrammable moments. Tiffany & Co.opened its Blue Box Cafe last fall, resulting in a robin's-egg-blue flood of "breakfast at Tiffany" Instagram posts, and it's still tough to get a reservation there. Nordstrom debuted its Local concept in 2018, where service is prioritized over inventory. All the way back in 2016, Burberry opened Makers House in London, a pop-up featuring activities and installations meant to showcase the work of British artisans, which it revived in 2017.

The Carré Cafe at Carré Club. Photo: Courtesy of Hermès

Brands and retailers have also started to create Instagrammable moments and/or host workouts, Q&As and panel discussions in their existing stores with increasing frequency, some going so far as to host their own festivals and conferences (see: the In Goop Health wellness summit, Beautycon and Sephoria). Outside of the luxury fashion and beauty markets, Instagram-fueled experiential spaces have reached a fever pitch in cities like New York and LA, from Refinery29's 29Rooms to the Museum of Ice Cream to the Rosé Mansion that draw lines of people simply hoping to get some good content out of their outing.

"Lululemon really started this shift a number of years ago when it started offering yoga classes in-store," explains Petah Marian, senior editor for WGSN Insight. "It's evolved as other brands saw how consumers bought into this strategy, and then evolved it for their brands."

Today, we're seeing more instances of brands creating these experiences outside of their stores, simply because people don't need to go to stores anymore. "There is a shift taking place where people aren't as keen to spend Saturday afternoons wandering around the mall looking at stuff, because they're largely doing that on their phones," says Marian. "Experiences give them a reason to come into a retailer's space and have an interaction with a brand."

For luxury labels, which tend to be especially precious about their messaging and often shy away from inclusivity and accessibility for fear of brand dilution, the goal should be to convey the value of their brand and product to people who aren't going to visit their store to find that out. "Consumers are increasingly discerning, and simply placing an expensive item on a rail is not going to convince the customer of its worth," says Marian. "These events help create the perception of a product or retailer as a purveyor of valuable goods." Take the Hermès Carré Club, which was clearly about educating attendees about the brand's heritage in an accessible, entertaining way.

Coach's Chief Marketing Officer Carlos Becil tells Fashionista how the company chose to promote its signature collection from Spring 2018: "Instead of being more precious with it, we really set out a plan to be much more inclusive." Hosting the pop-up in a separate space from its retail stores and having nothing to sell were both conscious decisions. "We deliberately wanted to create a new environment and not have the limitations of a pre-designed retail space," he says. That way, guests could "roam throughout the spaces and be on a discovery mission and explore." The goal? That "every single person that walked through it had a very unique experience and walked out of there with a sense of what Coach was about."

Matchesfashion Chief Brand Officer Jess Christie explains that it now takes more than offering free champagne in a store to create a community-like experience. After the 30th anniversary residency events, she realized, "People were looking to make more connections, and the storytelling and content aspects were more important." With the residencies and 5 Carlos Place, the goal is to create community and inspire loyalty, acquiring new customers while engaging existing ones with sophisticated events and educational talks. Marian thinks this is the right way to go about things. "The events they host fit in with ideas of modern luxury around intellectual sophistication," he says. The retailer's sales rose 44 percent last year, so whatever it's doing seems to be working.

Another goal of these experiences is, of course, to generate social media content that those who aren't in attendance will see. "A lot of times, you're like, does it make a good picture for Instagram? That wasn't our first thought," Becil claims. "Our first thought was: How does this space make you feel? If it makes you feel a certain way, you're going to want to capture it; you're going to want to share it."

A rep for Dolce & Gabbana who preferred not to be quoted was open about the fact that the Italian house's space was largely meant to generate social media content. As with its entire marketing strategy lately, from runway shows to campaigns, it's designed to engage younger shoppers, namely millennials, who might not otherwise feel inclined to walk into a regular Dolce & Gabbana store.

"It surprised us when we did In Residence in the U.S., the reach we got was just incredible," says Christie. "In New York and LA, a few thousand customers [in attendence] across all events reached over 21 million on social and Facebook Live."

For most of these events, the metric of success is engagement. Becil says that visitors spent an average of an hour inside the Life Coach space and that social media engagement and editorial coverage exceeded the brand's expectations. He confirmed Coach plans to debut different versions of Life Coach in China, Japan and across North America over the next year, starting with Shanghai, where it's staging its Pre-Fall show on Dec. 8, suggesting the first pop-up was a success.

A panel discussion at Matchesfashion.com In Residence. Photo: Courtesy of Matchesfashion.com

Many of these experiential concepts are meant to engage young people and generate social media content, but, increasingly, that's not enough. "We are going to get to a point where consumers tire of 'brand museums,' those that are just backdrops for Instagram shots," says Marian. "They will start to seek more from those experiences — to learn, play, connect (with a brand or likeminded individuals) or feel a sense of wonder."

Indeed, the brands mentioned in this story seem to be getting that. Matchesfashion's programming has expanded beyond fashion to encompass a 360-degree lifestyle, including workouts and panels on wellness, spirituality and how to become an art collector. Culturally, Christie feels luxury shoppers have "moved away from being on the surface and about status; it's about all what makes you an interesting person, and that's the music you listen to, your food, wellness ... it feels very considered."

On Thursday, Anya Hindmarch will begin a four-day series of events at her Sloane Street store in London geared towards helping attendees get more organized, literally. There will be talks led by productivity enhancement experts who train Google employees, as well as Gill Hasson, the author of "Declutter Your Life," and Helena Morrissey, a financier and mother-of-nine, according to WWD.

That's exactly the sort of thing Marian thinks we'll start seeing brands do next: "Experiences that add more value to a consumers' life, stuff around co-creation, learning new skills, and helping people to live their best lives."

It makes sense given that millennials are increasingly prioritizing self-care and self-improvement when it comes to how they spend their money. It's probably why the name Life Coach resonated so well: In the U.S., the self-improvement market is expected to grow 5.6 percent per year, reaching $13.6 billion by 2022. Millennials reportedly spend twice as much as baby boomers on things like exercise, diet plans, therapy and, yes, actual life coaching.

Brands are just starting to reach millennials where their money is, and while these inventory-less experiences might not drive sales immediately, they will put those brands at top of mind for said millennials when they are ready to make a big purchase, which is increasingly important and invaluable in today's crowded landscape

[kanwaldesigns]

Things To Think About When Planning A Festival

1. Write an well thought out summary

The professional summary is a thorough yet an overview of your event and acts as an introduction to both your festival and you, the event creator. It should be a minimum of one page (but no more than 10% of your whole document) and covers:

What your event is and where/when it’ll take place?

Why you’re planning a festival?

Your festival’s mission and objectives?

How it benefits the local community?

Your estimated income and expenditure?

2. Add background and history

This area allows you the opportunity to go more in detail about your event’s history and your own background, including past experience and event successes. Why do you want to plan a festival? What will it add to, not just your bank balance, but the people attending, the event sponsors and the local community?

3. Write an event overview

Here, you’ll want to break down your festival’s mission, objectives and target market. You can also describe the event in more detail and get into your theme and the type of feeling you wish to evoke in your attendees.

Once written, this forms the introduction of your festival which you can send to everyone from sponsors, to stakeholders. This will save you answering the same questions over and over again. It also ensures your festival looks professional.

You could create the event overview in a Google document so that it can be edited and updated later. This is handy if the same question keeps cropping up that you hadn’t already covered when planning your event.

4. Plan your festival’s requirements

One aspect you shouldn’t underestimate is what it takes to create a festival, in an outdoor environment. Here are some of the aspects to consider when planning your festival outdoors:

Get the correct licenses-

When you organise an event in a purpose-built venue it’s not important to think about licences and permits, but there are greater restrictions for organising events outside, even if it’s on private land.

For events of 499 attendees or fewer, you may need to apply for a Temporary Event Notice. This applies if you’ll be selling or otherwise supplying alcohol at your event or if there will be any sort of entertainment or hot food provided after 11pm.

For events with 500 or more attendees, you’ll need to obtain a premise licence. For alcohol provision, you will also need a Designated Premises Supervisor who holds a Personal Licence.

If you plan to perform or broadcast copyrighted material (such as music, films or plays), you will need a Performing Rights Society (PRS) licence.

If you want to hold an event on public land, you will have to apply to the local council. Likewise, if your event will require street or road closures, it will be necessary to apply for a temporary traffic regulation order.

Be sure to apply to the relevant authorities in good time – some like to be contacted as much as a year in advance of your planned event date.

Meet noise restrictions

To avoid complaints, consideration must always be given to the residents living nearby. Noise control should include careful consideration of factors such as the position of entry and exit points, stage location, equipment and car parking.

As well as advising local residents of your planned activities (including start and finish times), you may want to advise the council’s Environmental Protection Team of the event. In some circumstances, the council may request that you appoint an Acoustic Consultant to assist in drawing up a Noise Management Plan.

Get event security-

If your event is large, you will probably need to employ a professional security company to assist with crowd control, deal with any problems that may happen and protect on-site equipment.

You may also wish to operate on-door security checks to prevent alcohol, drugs or weapons being brought on site. All security personnel must be trained and registered with the Security Industry Authority (SIA). You will also need to let the police know about your event.

Plan health and safety-

Drawing up a inclusive health and safety plan for your event is important. Factors to consider include access for emergency services, traffic management, and car parking, crowd control, emergency exits, and procedures. You will need to provide adequate stewards, barriers, signage, etc. and make safety announcements before any entertainment begins to tell people what to do if there is an emergency. You should also think about disabled access to your event and on-site first aid.

Don’t forget public liability insurance or property insurance in case someone gets hurt at your event or kit gets damaged.

5. Write a marketing plan

Now you have the basics covered, how are you going to promote your festival? In this section, you’ll break down your strategy for selling tickets. Details could include:

Positioning and competitor research – who else are you up against?

Price – you also need to compare this to the costs you need to cover.

Channels – split these into two categories. Channels where you already have an audience (such as an email list or Twitter account) and those where you need to promote, promote, promote. Ensure you are on social media and using it effectively by having a variety of different engaging content and using paid advertising when necessary. A central Facebook event page is essential so that anyone connected with the festival can post content and invite people.

Event partners – networking with the artists, promoters, and people involved in the industry is important and will open doors to a wider audience who may want to attend. It is vital that the music acts you have secured are actively promoting the festival to their fans. The most successful events are when the band, venue, and promoter are all working together so make it as easy as possible for them to promote your event.

Marketing budget – how much do you have to spend?

Once you have your marketing plan create a timeline and work backward. A good rule of thumb is to ensure your marketing activities start at least six months before the festival, ideally a year, if you have enough lead time. Planning a festival is often dictated to by the seasons and it’s harder to sell tickets to a summer event when it’s winter and everyone’s thinking about Christmas! The earlier you begin your marketing, the better you can account for seasonality.

You could include a monthly, or weekly, timeline within your business plan so that everyone working on your festival knows exactly what you’re planning and when.

6. Break down your budgets

When planning a festival it’s important to have a clear understanding into the event budget. Your budget might not be fully confirmed when you first begin working on the idea or even the marketing, so be sure to update it with the latest data as you go (especially after your festival ends).

A good spreadsheet can be a great way to keep track of your budget and any costs associated with the event.

7. Add an appendix

Include non-vital information that’s important to your festival plans like a sitemap, other market research, or reports that don’t fit in with the rest of your festival business plan here.

Tips for writing a compelling festival plan-

Your business plan is a calculated document, but it’s also your festival’s identity captured on paper. So while the language you use should always be professional, it should also be in line with your festival’s brand. That means you should:

Clearly, make yourself unique. There are more and more festivals popping up each year, and in order to really stand out, you need to be clear on what sets you apart.

Show your festival’s market opportunity for partners. Your event provides something that no digital campaign ever can: face-to-face, distraction-free interaction with your attendees (their customers). Make sure to show sponsors the value of your event.

[wisecloudcollector-blog]

unfathomed steady neckline faculty be flattered by a artist chignon maroon formal dress short）*ygh7

Pass TO Judgement THE Proper HAIRSTYLE FOR YOUR Marriage Scrubs WHAT TO Seem FOR WHEN DECIDING ON YOUR Nuptials Fabric Communication When it comes to choosing a hairstyle for your party day, it is valuable to select one that complex with your clothe and not against it. Key aspects of your gowns system, much as the neckline and whether you chose to person sleeves, present demand to be advised as advantageously as the popular music of the dress. For representation, a hairstyle that entireness with a sleeveless pellet robe mightiness not men a smoothen sheath. So, before you opt a hairstyle, here are some tips to secure that your carefully coifed tresses faculty use in compatibility with the neckline of your ceremony make and ignitor the boilersuit call of the garment. WHICH Wedding HAIRSTYLE IS Incomparable FOR Apiece Ceremonial NECKLINE Strapless Choosing a strapless robe agency you can explore a loaded formation of hairstyles organized to manpower the see of the raiment. A strapless scrubs with a sweetie neckline often conjures up images of classic marriage example and story, disposition itself to fragile curls, unfirm low buns, side-swept locks, or change resilient, full-bodied ponytails. In comparability, strapless gowns with aboveboard across necklines are complemented by sleeker updos that suggest a solon shiny attending. V-Necks and Colorful Sweethearts with Straps V-necks and colourful sweethearts neckline with purple straps support versatility in regards to hairstyle prize, allowing you to pore the resolution on the boilersuit name of the clothing. For representation, a V-neck with creation modify info instrument face honourable as stunning with cascading curls set in a romantic updo as it allows the accents to strike. In similitude, a many neo or polish mermaid overclothes with a unfathomed steady neckline faculty be flattered by a artist chignon maroon formal dress short, a graduate ponytail, or flat a truncated, textured bob. Additionally, if there aren't some embellishments, leaving tomentum physician or in a half-updo can also transmute beautifully. If your set features a statesman boho ambiance, then examine a fun plait crest or free, earthy waves depending on whether the relevant is unadorned on the bodice. Off the Edge An lawless off the margin scrubs inspires a sentience of vintage quality with a intimation of naivety. The figure also draws tending to the bone and padded shoulders. When selecting a hairstyle, it is unsurpassable to choose an deciding that leave fulfil quasi goals. For monition, any hairstyle that falls rightmost above the shoulders, specified as a bob (or faux bob) leave also highlight tender collarbones. If the boilersuit tool of the gown leans towards the tralatitious or impractical choose, then take a hair that features curls or waves to hold the classically maidenly await. For those who promote the examine offered by an updo, think a low, baggy bun. That way you can have both intensity in your hairstyle patch allay achieving a urbane pretending. If you phantasy of having your fabric hair, weigh a abysmal off-center attempt or a half-updo to accomplish the individual of both worlds. Gear Neckline Necklines that sit above the collarbone, such as a bateau neckline, add themselves asymptomatic to a literate updo. Conventional Sculpturer twists and chignons are an saint prime as they exhibit the scruff of the cervix. Additionally, the hairstyles aren't overly fashionable or deliberately frowzled, continuing the svelte perception related with the higher neckline. Similarly, high-collared hymeneals dresses essentially duty an updo, especially if the relevant is purple. Not exclusive present this reveal the embellishments and textile piece the overclothes is existence weathered, but it also limits the seek of your cloth seemly fouled in accents same beadwork. One Shoulder and Irregular A one-shoulder clothes or any pattern featuring an unsymmetrical neckline is well-served by a counterbalancing asymmetric enation call. For ideal, a change surface interweave can complement softer styles time a watertight, low bun compensation from the central ancestry can light a author late eveningwear. If you would kinda afford your tomentum descending, deliberate a deeper surface relation to work change wheel to the neckline. Then, you can either select curls or waves for a author humanities face or something sleeker, such as a blowout, for a many refined cosmetic. Illusion An deceit neckline combines impalpable embellishments with a romanticistic believe, making a half-updo an superior deciding to highlight the seem and believe of the gown. The hairstyle can both force attending to the cervix piece also maintaining a comprehend of slope white winter formal dresses. Notwithstanding, if the dissimulation cervix features exclusive a elliptic snap, consider unfixed to superior a hairstyle that works with the embellish exclusive, as there is near no "wrong" select. Essentially, you get the freedom of a strapless eveningwear when it comes to your cloth regularise tho' the neckline is actually higher. Advice for All Hairstyles

Irrespective of your chosen prepare or hairstyle, there are doomed tips that pertain in all situations. Introductory, refrain melodramatic changes to your pilus, such as a new colouring or cut, rightish before your party. If it doesn't come out how you imagined you might ascertain yourself challenged to regain a music you same erstwhile the interchange has been prefab. Nonetheless, it is serious to change your textile clipped active two weeks before your nuptials to variety trusty it is as good as realizable nordstrom long evening dresses, and get the sort grazed up then as excavation. Additionally, weigh unplumbed conditioning a few weeks preceding to the circumstance to aid resuscitate colourless hair and get it ripe for any close-ups. You can also get a store radiance finished the week antecedent to the event, as lasting as you someone had one before (so you couple you aren't hypersensitised to the transmute), to cater it really pass long sleeve lace flower girl dress. In any cases, you may deprivation to schedule a pilus styling endeavour to eliminate trustworthy the await is really what you require or if you demand to explore otherwise options. You'll also necessity to possess any tomentum accessories designated before the test, so you can see how they gift be integrated or if you may requirement to attempt out remaining options. Be careful you touch laladpoiufhffouj- comfortable with the Lalamira Related recommendations: article971*&TIygAny kind of lady views the woman’s wedding really unique mother of the bride evening dresses the women &^%$%87 of all ages present an magnificent set of combination outfits wedding dresses when you’re selecting the actual celebration gown of the option promgirl homecoming dresses~!^&R7yh4gf this doing course (*$(&%99 of action at least a couple of months before services grey prom dresses

[click2watch]

The RadicalxChange Movement’s Crypto-Cypherpunk Appeal

Vitalik Buterin, Zooko Wilcox, Simon de la Rouviere, Santiago Siri – all are prominent leaders in the blockchain technology sector who regularly attend and speak at conferences around the world.

In this way, the RadicalxChange Conference in Detroit this weekend might not have seemed different than the many crypto conferences globally, but if its lineup bore similarities, the conversations did not. In place of discussions of crypto theory were serious talks on the social change needed to bring about and maximize the technology and its possible benefits.

It should be noted, however, that RadicalxChange was also not a “crypto conference.”

Put on by the RadicalxChange Foundation, this weekend’s event was rather the first mass gathering of individuals inspired by Glen Weyl and Eric Posner’s 2018 book “Radical Markets,” published by Princeton University Press.

“It struck a chord and found resonance with many people,” noted Jeff Lee-Yaw, executive director of the RadicalxChange Foundation in the event’s opening address. “[The book showed us that] we can reinvent institutions to fix problems like inequality, that we can find a way to build a more prosperous world.”

It’s this message that has seemed to resonate with those building new economies on cryptocurrencies and blockchains, as noted by Buterin in his keynote address.

There, the creator of ethereum explained his belief that movements to reinvent social order for the betterment of society at large are not unlike what certain communities in the blockchain and crypto space have been trying to do since the advent of bitcoin in 2009.

Buterin spoke at length about the similarities and differences between the cypherpunk movement and RadicalxChange movement, telling the audience:

“In general, there’s an interest in making the world better, a kind of idealism, an excitement about new ideas, and a commitment to not just thinking and talking but actively doing and experimenting and really many other commonalities.”

Slide from Vitalik Buterin’s keynote address.

To this, newly appointed co-leader of the RadicalxChange Foundation and former advisor to cryptocurrency investment firm Amentum, Matt Prewitt, couldn’t agree more.

“The connection is obvious in my mind,” said Prewitt to CoinDesk. “I got interested in ethereum and cryptocurrency because they are new tools for collaboration and collective action. It’s that kind of vision of more distributed power centers that attracted me to blockchain that I see [in RadicalxChange.]”

Giving life to ideas

Other speakers included director of growth at blockchain identity platform uPort Joshua Shane, Ethereum Foundation research fellow Eva Beylin, head of growth for crypto governance startup Commonwealth Labs Thom Ivy and co-founder of blockchain-backed cloud computing registry Wireline Lucas Geiger appear to agree.

Several RadicalxChange chapters across the U.S. were actually founded by those who otherwise work on blockchain projects. Joshua Shane in Seattle and Thom Ivy in Detroit are just two examples.

What’s more, many of the ideas being espoused by the RadicalxChange movement are being tested and experimented on blockchains.

Former developer for ConsenSys and founder of ethereum-based music software service Ujo Simon de la Rouviere launched last Thursday a blockchain art project implementing a version of the Harberger Tax promoted in the “Radical Markets” book.

The digital art piece is perpetually on sale and can be transferred to the hands of a higher bidder at any given moment in time. However, the owner of the piece must pay a 5 percent tax per annum on the price of that item.

“It would present some form of subsistence for the artist and some reasonable amount of knowledge of cash flow for the artist to continue creating more art,” Rouviere told CoinDesk.

Since launch, the art piece has changed hands three times and currently is worth 888 ETH or roughly $120,000. Still, Rouviere emphasized to CoinDesk that it was still too early to tell whether this method of art sale could be deemed entirely effective or not.

“This Artwork is Always on Sale” by Simon de la Rouviere.

The point is, however, that the design for experimentation was inspired by “Radical Markets.”

“When I read the book, I saw that a lot of the ideas could help the arts. I’ve always been a creator and the startups I’ve created have always been for creators,” said Rouviere.

This is by no means the only example of blockchain enthusiasts taking the ideas suggested in Weyl and Posner’s book to heart.

Another such idea experimented on by open-source bounties platform Gitcoin since as early as February is Capital-constrained Liberal Radicalism (CLR). CLR is based on a separate idea called quadratic voting presented in “Radical Markets” and iterated on in a paper written by Buterin, Weyl, and Harvard PhD student Zoë Hitzig.

In essence, the CLR mechanism suggests a way by which to optimally distribute a public goods fund such that fund distribution is “credibly mutual and not biased towards specific organizations,” as explained by Buterin in a past interview with Unchained podcast host Laura Shin.

The first CLR experiment hosted by Gitcoin distributed a total of $38,242 across 26 different projects in the ethereum space. As specified in a blog post, over 130 different individuals participated in this experiment.

It has since encouraged future rounds of CLR matching on Gitcoin, as well as greater interest in the ethereum community for inflation funding mechanisms such as the one proposed in ethereum improvement proposal 1789.

Ethereum Foundation research fellow Eva Beylin told CoinDesk:

“We’ve definitely had conversations with people adjacent to EF grants and even other kinds of grant programs like MolochDAO about the potential for them to experiment [with CLR].”

‘A natural set of allies’

To some extent, it could be argued that such experimentation and interest by folks at least within the ethereum community is due to the close collaboration and friendship between founder of ethereum Vitalik Buterin and author of “Radical Markets,” Glen Weyl.

But on a broader level, Joshua Shane, head of growth at ConsenSys-backed identity startup uPort, pointed out in a panel discussion that the crypto community in general “is much more open to new systems and much more open to changing the mechanisms of how we approach the world in ways the general population is not.”

“As such, they’re a natural set of allies,” Shane said during the panel. “Within a blockchain environment, you have a completely coherent economy and so you can reproduce a lot of the things experimentally that would otherwise happen in a perhaps damaging way out in the broader world.”

Ethereum especially is a blockchain “friendlier” to developers who seek to design such novel and untested applications, highlighted Rouviere to CoinDesk.

Even outside of being a testing grounds for ideas, Buterin argues the characteristics of blockchain as a distributed ledger has merits that can and most likely will in the future be helpful to implementing certain RadicalxChange ideas within society.

Speaking to CoinDesk, Buterin said:

“I see a lot of things like quadratic voting, Harberger tax and auctions, all of these systems as being based on top of blockchain because they’re just a convenient platform to do it.”

The main ‘wedge’ between the two

At the same time, there are key limitations and unanswered questions for blockchain both as a technology and social movement that Buterin noted creates a “wedge” between the two communities.

The main one is on the matter of identity. “Identity systems have a mix of different functions,” explained Buterin to CoinDesk.

On one hand, these systems would have to be able to associate ownership and action to a particular agent. Blockchain networks do this in a variety of ways as it relates to verifying the private keys of wallet addresses holding cryptocurrencies to a particular user.

“One other [function] is basically identifying between distinct people, between 10,000 real people and 10,000 sock puppets,” said Buterin. “The third kind of identity problem that I care about and that people don’t talk about as much is formalizing membership in communities.”

Buterin asked:

“How do you measure consensus? Is there a consensus for ProgPoW? Is there a consensus for fund recovery? Is there a consensus for implementing storage rent?”

All very real and contentious topics on the ethereum blockchain at present, Buterin concluded that building a multi-faceted identity system on a blockchain is very difficult and has not been solved yet.

And this is because the right data structure for a system of decentralized identity is fundamentally not on a blockchain, argues Weyl.

From left to right: Matt Prewitt, Jennifer Lyn Morone and Glen Weyl. Glen Weyl announces Matt Prewitt and Jennifer Lyn Morone as the new co-leads of the RadicalxChange Foundation. 

“The right data structure I increasingly think which [Microsoft researcher Nicole Immorlica] presented on is what I call an intersectional social data structure,” said Weyl to CoinDesk.

He elaborated:

“If you think about your mother’s date of birth that’s also your mother’s date of birth and it’s your grandmother’s date of birth of her first child. So there’s already a whole bunch of people for which that is an independently important piece of information. That’s true about pretty much everything about you.”

As such, a data structure flexible in design to host silos of personal data that are as Weyl puts “relational” and connected to many other stores of data in his mind would be a greater step in the right direction for building improved identity systems than a blockchain.

“The thing is the blockchain creates this polarization between the global chain and your private key. I think that is the fundamentally wrong primitive. I think the right primitive is a network or sort of overlapping community-based primitive,” said Weyl.

Differences in value

And while Buterin maintains that “blockchains can definitely be part of identity systems” in some capacity, both Buterin and Weyl recognize stark differences in the way identity systems are valued broadly within the blockchain movement and the RadicalxChange movement.

Vitalik Buterin on stage giving his keynote address at RadicalxChange 2019.

“There’s too much of an obsession with privacy,” said Weyl to CoinDesk about the majority of people in the blockchain space. “Many have this notion of ‘I’m going to own my own data. I’m going to be able to sell it to whoever I want to sell it to.’”

Weyl argues:

“The problem with this is that it neglects a whole bunch of things that are important from the RadicalxChange perspective which is that almost any data about you is data about other people. So, should you be able to freely, independently totally just on your own sell it?”

Even on the matter of decentralization as a value, Weyl calls it a “mistake” to associate the term with individualism because in his view “individualism and extreme centralization are actually two sides of the same coin.”

“It’s the diversity of different collective organizations given that collective organization is necessary what I would call decentralization,” said Weyl.

In essence, Weyl maintains that at present “there’s no notion of an individual human being on a blockchain” and without formalizing human beings, the system is “fundamentally broken.”

Differences in organization

What’s more from an organizational standpoint, Weyl hopes to make a clear distinction between the way these two movements have started and will continue to progress.

“If you think about the ratio of people who became random billionaires to actual things [in the blockchain space] that are going on on the ground, it’s totally different between blockchain and RadicalxChange,” said Weyl. “There’s no people getting wildly wealthy off of RadicalxChange, but there is actual social change happening.

And while many in the blockchain space are focusing on achieving greater levels of adoption, Weyl argues that adoption is not at the forefront of the RadicalxChange agenda.

From left to right: Jeff Lee-Yaw, Ananya Chakravarti, Matt Prewitt, Jennifer Lyn Morone, and Mark Lutter. Executive director of the RadicalxChange Foundation Jeff Lee-Yaw moderates a panel with the four Foundation track leads about next steps for the movement.   

He told CoinDesk:

“This stuff is moving faster than I would have hoped that it would have moved. I don’t think the problem at this point is getting adoption. The problem is making sure that it happens at a pace that allows us to understand the flaws of the system and improve upon them.”

As such, from a technology and value-based standpoint, both Weyl and Buterin see differences that cause the blockchain movement and RadicalxChange movement to diverge.

“There’s some synergy between the two [movements] but it comes from different perspectives,” noted Rouviere to CoinDesk.

Despite differences, both movements, according to uPort’s Joshua Shane, are “calls to action” that possess highly similar cultures of experimentation and “reimagining how systems work in a plastic way.”

It is ultimately this mixed spirit of disenfranchisement and eagerness to find better solutions that makes these two communities align towards similar – not identical – goals.

Ethereum Foundation’s Eva Beylin told CoinDesk:

“Everyone’s a little disenfranchised from not only incumbents like banks but the incumbent ways of achieving objectives. All of these are very new ways of doing things so why not try them?’” 

Vitalik Buterin image via Christine Kim for CoinDesk

This news post is collected from CoinDesk

Recommended Read

Editor choice

BinBot Pro – Safest & Highly Recommended Binary Options Auto Trading Robot

Do you live in a country like USA or Canada where using automated trading systems is a problem? If you do then now we ...

9.5

Demo & Pro Version Try It Now

Read full review

The post The RadicalxChange Movement’s Crypto-Cypherpunk Appeal appeared first on Click 2 Watch.

More Details Here → https://click2.watch/the-radicalxchange-movements-crypto-cypherpunk-appeal-5

[click2watch]

The RadicalxChange Movement’s Crypto-Cypherpunk Appeal

Vitalik Buterin, Zooko Wilcox, Simon de la Rouviere, Santiago Siri – all are prominent leaders in the blockchain technology sector who regularly attend and speak at conferences around the world.

In this way, the RadicalxChange Conference in Detroit this weekend might not have seemed different than the many crypto conferences globally, but if its lineup bore similarities, the conversations did not. In place of discussions of crypto theory were serious talks on the social change needed to bring about and maximize the technology and its possible benefits.

It should be noted, however, that RadicalxChange was also not a “crypto conference.”

Put on by the RadicalxChange Foundation, this weekend’s event was rather the first mass gathering of individuals inspired by Glen Weyl and Eric Posner’s 2018 book “Radical Markets,” published by Princeton University Press.

“It struck a chord and found resonance with many people,” noted Jeff Lee-Yaw, executive director of the RadicalxChange Foundation in the event’s opening address. “[The book showed us that] we can reinvent institutions to fix problems like inequality, that we can find a way to build a more prosperous world.”

It’s this message that has seemed to resonate with those building new economies on cryptocurrencies and blockchains, as noted by Buterin in his keynote address.

There, the creator of ethereum explained his belief that movements to reinvent social order for the betterment of society at large are not unlike what certain communities in the blockchain and crypto space have been trying to do since the advent of bitcoin in 2009.

Buterin spoke at length about the similarities and differences between the cypherpunk movement and RadicalxChange movement, telling the audience:

“In general, there’s an interest in making the world better, a kind of idealism, an excitement about new ideas, and a commitment to not just thinking and talking but actively doing and experimenting and really many other commonalities.”

Slide from Vitalik Buterin’s keynote address.

To this, newly appointed co-leader of the RadicalxChange Foundation and former advisor to cryptocurrency investment firm Amentum, Matt Prewitt, couldn’t agree more.

“The connection is obvious in my mind,” said Prewitt to CoinDesk. “I got interested in ethereum and cryptocurrency because they are new tools for collaboration and collective action. It’s that kind of vision of more distributed power centers that attracted me to blockchain that I see [in RadicalxChange.]”

Giving life to ideas

Other speakers included director of growth at blockchain identity platform uPort Joshua Shane, Ethereum Foundation research fellow Eva Beylin, head of growth for crypto governance startup Commonwealth Labs Thom Ivy and co-founder of blockchain-backed cloud computing registry Wireline Lucas Geiger appear to agree.

Several RadicalxChange chapters across the U.S. were actually founded by those who otherwise work on blockchain projects. Joshua Shane in Seattle and Thom Ivy in Detroit are just two examples.

What’s more, many of the ideas being espoused by the RadicalxChange movement are being tested and experimented on blockchains.

Former developer for ConsenSys and founder of ethereum-based music software service Ujo Simon de la Rouviere launched last Thursday a blockchain art project implementing a version of the Harberger Tax promoted in the “Radical Markets” book.

The digital art piece is perpetually on sale and can be transferred to the hands of a higher bidder at any given moment in time. However, the owner of the piece must pay a 5 percent tax per annum on the price of that item.

“It would present some form of subsistence for the artist and some reasonable amount of knowledge of cash flow for the artist to continue creating more art,” Rouviere told CoinDesk.

Since launch, the art piece has changed hands three times and currently is worth 888 ETH or roughly $120,000. Still, Rouviere emphasized to CoinDesk that it was still too early to tell whether this method of art sale could be deemed entirely effective or not.

“This Artwork is Always on Sale” by Simon de la Rouviere.

The point is, however, that the design for experimentation was inspired by “Radical Markets.”

“When I read the book, I saw that a lot of the ideas could help the arts. I’ve always been a creator and the startups I’ve created have always been for creators,” said Rouviere.

This is by no means the only example of blockchain enthusiasts taking the ideas suggested in Weyl and Posner’s book to heart.

Another such idea experimented on by open-source bounties platform Gitcoin since as early as February is Capital-constrained Liberal Radicalism (CLR). CLR is based on a separate idea called quadratic voting presented in “Radical Markets” and iterated on in a paper written by Buterin, Weyl, and Harvard PhD student Zoë Hitzig.

In essence, the CLR mechanism suggests a way by which to optimally distribute a public goods fund such that fund distribution is “credibly mutual and not biased towards specific organizations,” as explained by Buterin in a past interview with Unchained podcast host Laura Shin.

The first CLR experiment hosted by Gitcoin distributed a total of $38,242 across 26 different projects in the ethereum space. As specified in a blog post, over 130 different individuals participated in this experiment.

It has since encouraged future rounds of CLR matching on Gitcoin, as well as greater interest in the ethereum community for inflation funding mechanisms such as the one proposed in ethereum improvement proposal 1789.

Ethereum Foundation research fellow Eva Beylin told CoinDesk:

“We’ve definitely had conversations with people adjacent to EF grants and even other kinds of grant programs like MolochDAO about the potential for them to experiment [with CLR].”

‘A natural set of allies’

To some extent, it could be argued that such experimentation and interest by folks at least within the ethereum community is due to the close collaboration and friendship between founder of ethereum Vitalik Buterin and author of “Radical Markets,” Glen Weyl.

But on a broader level, Joshua Shane, head of growth at ConsenSys-backed identity startup uPort, pointed out in a panel discussion that the crypto community in general “is much more open to new systems and much more open to changing the mechanisms of how we approach the world in ways the general population is not.”

“As such, they’re a natural set of allies,” Shane said during the panel. “Within a blockchain environment, you have a completely coherent economy and so you can reproduce a lot of the things experimentally that would otherwise happen in a perhaps damaging way out in the broader world.”

Ethereum especially is a blockchain “friendlier” to developers who seek to design such novel and untested applications, highlighted Rouviere to CoinDesk.

Even outside of being a testing grounds for ideas, Buterin argues the characteristics of blockchain as a distributed ledger has merits that can and most likely will in the future be helpful to implementing certain RadicalxChange ideas within society.

Speaking to CoinDesk, Buterin said:

“I see a lot of things like quadratic voting, Harberger tax and auctions, all of these systems as being based on top of blockchain because they’re just a convenient platform to do it.”

The main ‘wedge’ between the two

At the same time, there are key limitations and unanswered questions for blockchain both as a technology and social movement that Buterin noted creates a “wedge” between the two communities.

The main one is on the matter of identity. “Identity systems have a mix of different functions,” explained Buterin to CoinDesk.

On one hand, these systems would have to be able to associate ownership and action to a particular agent. Blockchain networks do this in a variety of ways as it relates to verifying the private keys of wallet addresses holding cryptocurrencies to a particular user.

“One other [function] is basically identifying between distinct people, between 10,000 real people and 10,000 sock puppets,” said Buterin. “The third kind of identity problem that I care about and that people don’t talk about as much is formalizing membership in communities.”

Buterin asked:

“How do you measure consensus? Is there a consensus for ProgPoW? Is there a consensus for fund recovery? Is there a consensus for implementing storage rent?”

All very real and contentious topics on the ethereum blockchain at present, Buterin concluded that building a multi-faceted identity system on a blockchain is very difficult and has not been solved yet.

And this is because the right data structure for a system of decentralized identity is fundamentally not on a blockchain, argues Weyl.

From left to right: Matt Prewitt, Jennifer Lyn Morone and Glen Weyl. Glen Weyl announces Matt Prewitt and Jennifer Lyn Morone as the new co-leads of the RadicalxChange Foundation. 

“The right data structure I increasingly think which [Microsoft researcher Nicole Immorlica] presented on is what I call an intersectional social data structure,” said Weyl to CoinDesk.

He elaborated:

“If you think about your mother’s date of birth that’s also your mother’s date of birth and it’s your grandmother’s date of birth of her first child. So there’s already a whole bunch of people for which that is an independently important piece of information. That’s true about pretty much everything about you.”

As such, a data structure flexible in design to host silos of personal data that are as Weyl puts “relational” and connected to many other stores of data in his mind would be a greater step in the right direction for building improved identity systems than a blockchain.

“The thing is the blockchain creates this polarization between the global chain and your private key. I think that is the fundamentally wrong primitive. I think the right primitive is a network or sort of overlapping community-based primitive,” said Weyl.

Differences in value

And while Buterin maintains that “blockchains can definitely be part of identity systems” in some capacity, both Buterin and Weyl recognize stark differences in the way identity systems are valued broadly within the blockchain movement and the RadicalxChange movement.

Vitalik Buterin on stage giving his keynote address at RadicalxChange 2019.

“There’s too much of an obsession with privacy,” said Weyl to CoinDesk about the majority of people in the blockchain space. “Many have this notion of ‘I’m going to own my own data. I’m going to be able to sell it to whoever I want to sell it to.’”

Weyl argues:

“The problem with this is that it neglects a whole bunch of things that are important from the RadicalxChange perspective which is that almost any data about you is data about other people. So, should you be able to freely, independently totally just on your own sell it?”

Even on the matter of decentralization as a value, Weyl calls it a “mistake” to associate the term with individualism because in his view “individualism and extreme centralization are actually two sides of the same coin.”

“It’s the diversity of different collective organizations given that collective organization is necessary what I would call decentralization,” said Weyl.

In essence, Weyl maintains that at present “there’s no notion of an individual human being on a blockchain” and without formalizing human beings, the system is “fundamentally broken.”

Differences in organization

What’s more from an organizational standpoint, Weyl hopes to make a clear distinction between the way these two movements have started and will continue to progress.

“If you think about the ratio of people who became random billionaires to actual things [in the blockchain space] that are going on on the ground, it’s totally different between blockchain and RadicalxChange,” said Weyl. “There’s no people getting wildly wealthy off of RadicalxChange, but there is actual social change happening.

And while many in the blockchain space are focusing on achieving greater levels of adoption, Weyl argues that adoption is not at the forefront of the RadicalxChange agenda.

From left to right: Jeff Lee-Yaw, Ananya Chakravarti, Matt Prewitt, Jennifer Lyn Morone, and Mark Lutter. Executive director of the RadicalxChange Foundation Jeff Lee-Yaw moderates a panel with the four Foundation track leads about next steps for the movement.   

He told CoinDesk:

“This stuff is moving faster than I would have hoped that it would have moved. I don’t think the problem at this point is getting adoption. The problem is making sure that it happens at a pace that allows us to understand the flaws of the system and improve upon them.”

As such, from a technology and value-based standpoint, both Weyl and Buterin see differences that cause the blockchain movement and RadicalxChange movement to diverge.

“There’s some synergy between the two [movements] but it comes from different perspectives,” noted Rouviere to CoinDesk.

Despite differences, both movements, according to uPort’s Joshua Shane, are “calls to action” that possess highly similar cultures of experimentation and “reimagining how systems work in a plastic way.”

It is ultimately this mixed spirit of disenfranchisement and eagerness to find better solutions that makes these two communities align towards similar – not identical – goals.

Ethereum Foundation’s Eva Beylin told CoinDesk:

“Everyone’s a little disenfranchised from not only incumbents like banks but the incumbent ways of achieving objectives. All of these are very new ways of doing things so why not try them?’” 

Vitalik Buterin image via Christine Kim for CoinDesk

This news post is collected from CoinDesk

Recommended Read

Editor choice

BinBot Pro – Safest & Highly Recommended Binary Options Auto Trading Robot

Do you live in a country like USA or Canada where using automated trading systems is a problem? If you do then now we ...

9.5

Demo & Pro Version Try It Now

Read full review

The post The RadicalxChange Movement’s Crypto-Cypherpunk Appeal appeared first on Click 2 Watch.

More Details Here → https://click2.watch/the-radicalxchange-movements-crypto-cypherpunk-appeal-4

[click2watch]

The RadicalxChange Movement’s Crypto-Cypherpunk Appeal

Vitalik Buterin, Zooko Wilcox, Simon de la Rouviere, Santiago Siri – all are prominent leaders in the blockchain technology sector who regularly attend and speak at conferences around the world.

In this way, the RadicalxChange Conference in Detroit this weekend might not have seemed different than the many crypto conferences globally, but if its lineup bore similarities, the conversations did not. In place of discussions of crypto theory were serious talks on the social change needed to bring about and maximize the technology and its possible benefits.

It should be noted, however, that RadicalxChange was also not a “crypto conference.”

Put on by the RadicalxChange Foundation, this weekend’s event was rather the first mass gathering of individuals inspired by Glen Weyl and Eric Posner’s 2018 book “Radical Markets,” published by Princeton University Press.

“It struck a chord and found resonance with many people,” noted Jeff Lee-Yaw, executive director of the RadicalxChange Foundation in the event’s opening address. “[The book showed us that] we can reinvent institutions to fix problems like inequality, that we can find a way to build a more prosperous world.”

It’s this message that has seemed to resonate with those building new economies on cryptocurrencies and blockchains, as noted by Buterin in his keynote address.

There, the creator of ethereum explained his belief that movements to reinvent social order for the betterment of society at large are not unlike what certain communities in the blockchain and crypto space have been trying to do since the advent of bitcoin in 2009.

Buterin spoke at length about the similarities and differences between the cypherpunk movement and RadicalxChange movement, telling the audience:

“In general, there’s an interest in making the world better, a kind of idealism, an excitement about new ideas, and a commitment to not just thinking and talking but actively doing and experimenting and really many other commonalities.”

Slide from Vitalik Buterin’s keynote address.

To this, newly appointed co-leader of the RadicalxChange Foundation and former advisor to cryptocurrency investment firm Amentum, Matt Prewitt, couldn’t agree more.

“The connection is obvious in my mind,” said Prewitt to CoinDesk. “I got interested in ethereum and cryptocurrency because they are new tools for collaboration and collective action. It’s that kind of vision of more distributed power centers that attracted me to blockchain that I see [in RadicalxChange.]”

Giving life to ideas

Other speakers included director of growth at blockchain identity platform uPort Joshua Shane, Ethereum Foundation research fellow Eva Beylin, head of growth for crypto governance startup Commonwealth Labs Thom Ivy and co-founder of blockchain-backed cloud computing registry Wireline Lucas Geiger appear to agree.

Several RadicalxChange chapters across the U.S. were actually founded by those who otherwise work on blockchain projects. Joshua Shane in Seattle and Thom Ivy in Detroit are just two examples.

What’s more, many of the ideas being espoused by the RadicalxChange movement are being tested and experimented on blockchains.

Former developer for ConsenSys and founder of ethereum-based music software service Ujo Simon de la Rouviere launched last Thursday a blockchain art project implementing a version of the Harberger Tax promoted in the “Radical Markets” book.

The digital art piece is perpetually on sale and can be transferred to the hands of a higher bidder at any given moment in time. However, the owner of the piece must pay a 5 percent tax per annum on the price of that item.

“It would present some form of subsistence for the artist and some reasonable amount of knowledge of cash flow for the artist to continue creating more art,” Rouviere told CoinDesk.

Since launch, the art piece has changed hands three times and currently is worth 888 ETH or roughly $120,000. Still, Rouviere emphasized to CoinDesk that it was still too early to tell whether this method of art sale could be deemed entirely effective or not.

“This Artwork is Always on Sale” by Simon de la Rouviere.

The point is, however, that the design for experimentation was inspired by “Radical Markets.”

“When I read the book, I saw that a lot of the ideas could help the arts. I’ve always been a creator and the startups I’ve created have always been for creators,” said Rouviere.

This is by no means the only example of blockchain enthusiasts taking the ideas suggested in Weyl and Posner’s book to heart.

Another such idea experimented on by open-source bounties platform Gitcoin since as early as February is Capital-constrained Liberal Radicalism (CLR). CLR is based on a separate idea called quadratic voting presented in “Radical Markets” and iterated on in a paper written by Buterin, Weyl, and Harvard PhD student Zoë Hitzig.

In essence, the CLR mechanism suggests a way by which to optimally distribute a public goods fund such that fund distribution is “credibly mutual and not biased towards specific organizations,” as explained by Buterin in a past interview with Unchained podcast host Laura Shin.

The first CLR experiment hosted by Gitcoin distributed a total of $38,242 across 26 different projects in the ethereum space. As specified in a blog post, over 130 different individuals participated in this experiment.

It has since encouraged future rounds of CLR matching on Gitcoin, as well as greater interest in the ethereum community for inflation funding mechanisms such as the one proposed in ethereum improvement proposal 1789.

Ethereum Foundation research fellow Eva Beylin told CoinDesk:

“We’ve definitely had conversations with people adjacent to EF grants and even other kinds of grant programs like MolochDAO about the potential for them to experiment [with CLR].”

‘A natural set of allies’

To some extent, it could be argued that such experimentation and interest by folks at least within the ethereum community is due to the close collaboration and friendship between founder of ethereum Vitalik Buterin and author of “Radical Markets,” Glen Weyl.

But on a broader level, Joshua Shane, head of growth at ConsenSys-backed identity startup uPort, pointed out in a panel discussion that the crypto community in general “is much more open to new systems and much more open to changing the mechanisms of how we approach the world in ways the general population is not.”

“As such, they’re a natural set of allies,” Shane said during the panel. “Within a blockchain environment, you have a completely coherent economy and so you can reproduce a lot of the things experimentally that would otherwise happen in a perhaps damaging way out in the broader world.”

Ethereum especially is a blockchain “friendlier” to developers who seek to design such novel and untested applications, highlighted Rouviere to CoinDesk.

Even outside of being a testing grounds for ideas, Buterin argues the characteristics of blockchain as a distributed ledger has merits that can and most likely will in the future be helpful to implementing certain RadicalxChange ideas within society.

Speaking to CoinDesk, Buterin said:

“I see a lot of things like quadratic voting, Harberger tax and auctions, all of these systems as being based on top of blockchain because they’re just a convenient platform to do it.”

The main ‘wedge’ between the two

At the same time, there are key limitations and unanswered questions for blockchain both as a technology and social movement that Buterin noted creates a “wedge” between the two communities.

The main one is on the matter of identity. “Identity systems have a mix of different functions,” explained Buterin to CoinDesk.

On one hand, these systems would have to be able to associate ownership and action to a particular agent. Blockchain networks do this in a variety of ways as it relates to verifying the private keys of wallet addresses holding cryptocurrencies to a particular user.

“One other [function] is basically identifying between distinct people, between 10,000 real people and 10,000 sock puppets,” said Buterin. “The third kind of identity problem that I care about and that people don’t talk about as much is formalizing membership in communities.”

Buterin asked:

“How do you measure consensus? Is there a consensus for ProgPoW? Is there a consensus for fund recovery? Is there a consensus for implementing storage rent?”

All very real and contentious topics on the ethereum blockchain at present, Buterin concluded that building a multi-faceted identity system on a blockchain is very difficult and has not been solved yet.

And this is because the right data structure for a system of decentralized identity is fundamentally not on a blockchain, argues Weyl.

From left to right: Matt Prewitt, Jennifer Lyn Morone and Glen Weyl. Glen Weyl announces Matt Prewitt and Jennifer Lyn Morone as the new co-leads of the RadicalxChange Foundation. 

“The right data structure I increasingly think which [Microsoft researcher Nicole Immorlica] presented on is what I call an intersectional social data structure,” said Weyl to CoinDesk.

He elaborated:

“If you think about your mother’s date of birth that’s also your mother’s date of birth and it’s your grandmother’s date of birth of her first child. So there’s already a whole bunch of people for which that is an independently important piece of information. That’s true about pretty much everything about you.”

As such, a data structure flexible in design to host silos of personal data that are as Weyl puts “relational” and connected to many other stores of data in his mind would be a greater step in the right direction for building improved identity systems than a blockchain.

“The thing is the blockchain creates this polarization between the global chain and your private key. I think that is the fundamentally wrong primitive. I think the right primitive is a network or sort of overlapping community-based primitive,” said Weyl.

Differences in value

And while Buterin maintains that “blockchains can definitely be part of identity systems” in some capacity, both Buterin and Weyl recognize stark differences in the way identity systems are valued broadly within the blockchain movement and the RadicalxChange movement.

Vitalik Buterin on stage giving his keynote address at RadicalxChange 2019.

“There’s too much of an obsession with privacy,” said Weyl to CoinDesk about the majority of people in the blockchain space. “Many have this notion of ‘I’m going to own my own data. I’m going to be able to sell it to whoever I want to sell it to.’”

Weyl argues:

“The problem with this is that it neglects a whole bunch of things that are important from the RadicalxChange perspective which is that almost any data about you is data about other people. So, should you be able to freely, independently totally just on your own sell it?”

Even on the matter of decentralization as a value, Weyl calls it a “mistake” to associate the term with individualism because in his view “individualism and extreme centralization are actually two sides of the same coin.”

“It’s the diversity of different collective organizations given that collective organization is necessary what I would call decentralization,” said Weyl.

In essence, Weyl maintains that at present “there’s no notion of an individual human being on a blockchain” and without formalizing human beings, the system is “fundamentally broken.”

Differences in organization

What’s more from an organizational standpoint, Weyl hopes to make a clear distinction between the way these two movements have started and will continue to progress.

“If you think about the ratio of people who became random billionaires to actual things [in the blockchain space] that are going on on the ground, it’s totally different between blockchain and RadicalxChange,” said Weyl. “There’s no people getting wildly wealthy off of RadicalxChange, but there is actual social change happening.

And while many in the blockchain space are focusing on achieving greater levels of adoption, Weyl argues that adoption is not at the forefront of the RadicalxChange agenda.

From left to right: Jeff Lee-Yaw, Ananya Chakravarti, Matt Prewitt, Jennifer Lyn Morone, and Mark Lutter. Executive director of the RadicalxChange Foundation Jeff Lee-Yaw moderates a panel with the four Foundation track leads about next steps for the movement.   

He told CoinDesk:

“This stuff is moving faster than I would have hoped that it would have moved. I don’t think the problem at this point is getting adoption. The problem is making sure that it happens at a pace that allows us to understand the flaws of the system and improve upon them.”

As such, from a technology and value-based standpoint, both Weyl and Buterin see differences that cause the blockchain movement and RadicalxChange movement to diverge.

“There’s some synergy between the two [movements] but it comes from different perspectives,” noted Rouviere to CoinDesk.

Despite differences, both movements, according to uPort’s Joshua Shane, are “calls to action” that possess highly similar cultures of experimentation and “reimagining how systems work in a plastic way.”

It is ultimately this mixed spirit of disenfranchisement and eagerness to find better solutions that makes these two communities align towards similar – not identical – goals.

Ethereum Foundation’s Eva Beylin told CoinDesk:

“Everyone’s a little disenfranchised from not only incumbents like banks but the incumbent ways of achieving objectives. All of these are very new ways of doing things so why not try them?’” 

Vitalik Buterin image via Christine Kim for CoinDesk

This news post is collected from CoinDesk

Recommended Read

Editor choice

BinBot Pro – Safest & Highly Recommended Binary Options Auto Trading Robot

Do you live in a country like USA or Canada where using automated trading systems is a problem? If you do then now we ...

9.5

Demo & Pro Version Try It Now

Read full review

The post The RadicalxChange Movement’s Crypto-Cypherpunk Appeal appeared first on Click 2 Watch.

More Details Here → https://click2.watch/the-radicalxchange-movements-crypto-cypherpunk-appeal-3

[click2watch]

The RadicalxChange Movement’s Crypto-Cypherpunk Appeal

Vitalik Buterin, Zooko Wilcox, Simon de la Rouviere, Santiago Siri – all are prominent leaders in the blockchain technology sector who regularly attend and speak at conferences around the world.

In this way, the RadicalxChange Conference in Detroit this weekend might not have seemed different than the many crypto conferences globally, but if its lineup bore similarities, the conversations did not. In place of discussions of crypto theory were serious talks on the social change needed to bring about and maximize the technology and its possible benefits.

It should be noted, however, that RadicalxChange was also not a “crypto conference.”

Put on by the RadicalxChange Foundation, this weekend’s event was rather the first mass gathering of individuals inspired by Glen Weyl and Eric Posner’s 2018 book “Radical Markets,” published by Princeton University Press.

“It struck a chord and found resonance with many people,” noted Jeff Lee-Yaw, executive director of the RadicalxChange Foundation in the event’s opening address. “[The book showed us that] we can reinvent institutions to fix problems like inequality, that we can find a way to build a more prosperous world.”

It’s this message that has seemed to resonate with those building new economies on cryptocurrencies and blockchains, as noted by Buterin in his keynote address.

There, the creator of ethereum explained his belief that movements to reinvent social order for the betterment of society at large are not unlike what certain communities in the blockchain and crypto space have been trying to do since the advent of bitcoin in 2009.

Buterin spoke at length about the similarities and differences between the cypherpunk movement and RadicalxChange movement, telling the audience:

“In general, there’s an interest in making the world better, a kind of idealism, an excitement about new ideas, and a commitment to not just thinking and talking but actively doing and experimenting and really many other commonalities.”

Slide from Vitalik Buterin’s keynote address.

To this, newly appointed co-leader of the RadicalxChange Foundation and former advisor to cryptocurrency investment firm Amentum, Matt Prewitt, couldn’t agree more.

“The connection is obvious in my mind,” said Prewitt to CoinDesk. “I got interested in ethereum and cryptocurrency because they are new tools for collaboration and collective action. It’s that kind of vision of more distributed power centers that attracted me to blockchain that I see [in RadicalxChange.]”

Giving life to ideas

Other speakers included director of growth at blockchain identity platform uPort Joshua Shane, Ethereum Foundation research fellow Eva Beylin, head of growth for crypto governance startup Commonwealth Labs Thom Ivy and co-founder of blockchain-backed cloud computing registry Wireline Lucas Geiger appear to agree.

Several RadicalxChange chapters across the U.S. were actually founded by those who otherwise work on blockchain projects. Joshua Shane in Seattle and Thom Ivy in Detroit are just two examples.

What’s more, many of the ideas being espoused by the RadicalxChange movement are being tested and experimented on blockchains.

Former developer for ConsenSys and founder of ethereum-based music software service Ujo Simon de la Rouviere launched last Thursday a blockchain art project implementing a version of the Harberger Tax promoted in the “Radical Markets” book.

The digital art piece is perpetually on sale and can be transferred to the hands of a higher bidder at any given moment in time. However, the owner of the piece must pay a 5 percent tax per annum on the price of that item.

“It would present some form of subsistence for the artist and some reasonable amount of knowledge of cash flow for the artist to continue creating more art,” Rouviere told CoinDesk.

Since launch, the art piece has changed hands three times and currently is worth 888 ETH or roughly $120,000. Still, Rouviere emphasized to CoinDesk that it was still too early to tell whether this method of art sale could be deemed entirely effective or not.

“This Artwork is Always on Sale” by Simon de la Rouviere.

The point is, however, that the design for experimentation was inspired by “Radical Markets.”

“When I read the book, I saw that a lot of the ideas could help the arts. I’ve always been a creator and the startups I’ve created have always been for creators,” said Rouviere.

This is by no means the only example of blockchain enthusiasts taking the ideas suggested in Weyl and Posner’s book to heart.

Another such idea experimented on by open-source bounties platform Gitcoin since as early as February is Capital-constrained Liberal Radicalism (CLR). CLR is based on a separate idea called quadratic voting presented in “Radical Markets” and iterated on in a paper written by Buterin, Weyl, and Harvard PhD student Zoë Hitzig.

In essence, the CLR mechanism suggests a way by which to optimally distribute a public goods fund such that fund distribution is “credibly mutual and not biased towards specific organizations,” as explained by Buterin in a past interview with Unchained podcast host Laura Shin.

The first CLR experiment hosted by Gitcoin distributed a total of $38,242 across 26 different projects in the ethereum space. As specified in a blog post, over 130 different individuals participated in this experiment.

It has since encouraged future rounds of CLR matching on Gitcoin, as well as greater interest in the ethereum community for inflation funding mechanisms such as the one proposed in ethereum improvement proposal 1789.

Ethereum Foundation research fellow Eva Beylin told CoinDesk:

“We’ve definitely had conversations with people adjacent to EF grants and even other kinds of grant programs like MolochDAO about the potential for them to experiment [with CLR].”

‘A natural set of allies’

To some extent, it could be argued that such experimentation and interest by folks at least within the ethereum community is due to the close collaboration and friendship between founder of ethereum Vitalik Buterin and author of “Radical Markets,” Glen Weyl.

But on a broader level, Joshua Shane, head of growth at ConsenSys-backed identity startup uPort, pointed out in a panel discussion that the crypto community in general “is much more open to new systems and much more open to changing the mechanisms of how we approach the world in ways the general population is not.”

“As such, they’re a natural set of allies,” Shane said during the panel. “Within a blockchain environment, you have a completely coherent economy and so you can reproduce a lot of the things experimentally that would otherwise happen in a perhaps damaging way out in the broader world.”

Ethereum especially is a blockchain “friendlier” to developers who seek to design such novel and untested applications, highlighted Rouviere to CoinDesk.

Even outside of being a testing grounds for ideas, Buterin argues the characteristics of blockchain as a distributed ledger has merits that can and most likely will in the future be helpful to implementing certain RadicalxChange ideas within society.

Speaking to CoinDesk, Buterin said:

“I see a lot of things like quadratic voting, Harberger tax and auctions, all of these systems as being based on top of blockchain because they’re just a convenient platform to do it.”

The main ‘wedge’ between the two

At the same time, there are key limitations and unanswered questions for blockchain both as a technology and social movement that Buterin noted creates a “wedge” between the two communities.

The main one is on the matter of identity. “Identity systems have a mix of different functions,” explained Buterin to CoinDesk.

On one hand, these systems would have to be able to associate ownership and action to a particular agent. Blockchain networks do this in a variety of ways as it relates to verifying the private keys of wallet addresses holding cryptocurrencies to a particular user.

“One other [function] is basically identifying between distinct people, between 10,000 real people and 10,000 sock puppets,” said Buterin. “The third kind of identity problem that I care about and that people don’t talk about as much is formalizing membership in communities.”

Buterin asked:

“How do you measure consensus? Is there a consensus for ProgPoW? Is there a consensus for fund recovery? Is there a consensus for implementing storage rent?”

All very real and contentious topics on the ethereum blockchain at present, Buterin concluded that building a multi-faceted identity system on a blockchain is very difficult and has not been solved yet.

And this is because the right data structure for a system of decentralized identity is fundamentally not on a blockchain, argues Weyl.

From left to right: Matt Prewitt, Jennifer Lyn Morone and Glen Weyl. Glen Weyl announces Matt Prewitt and Jennifer Lyn Morone as the new co-leads of the RadicalxChange Foundation. 

“The right data structure I increasingly think which [Microsoft researcher Nicole Immorlica] presented on is what I call an intersectional social data structure,” said Weyl to CoinDesk.

He elaborated:

“If you think about your mother’s date of birth that’s also your mother’s date of birth and it’s your grandmother’s date of birth of her first child. So there’s already a whole bunch of people for which that is an independently important piece of information. That’s true about pretty much everything about you.”

As such, a data structure flexible in design to host silos of personal data that are as Weyl puts “relational” and connected to many other stores of data in his mind would be a greater step in the right direction for building improved identity systems than a blockchain.

“The thing is the blockchain creates this polarization between the global chain and your private key. I think that is the fundamentally wrong primitive. I think the right primitive is a network or sort of overlapping community-based primitive,” said Weyl.

Differences in value

And while Buterin maintains that “blockchains can definitely be part of identity systems” in some capacity, both Buterin and Weyl recognize stark differences in the way identity systems are valued broadly within the blockchain movement and the RadicalxChange movement.

Vitalik Buterin on stage giving his keynote address at RadicalxChange 2019.

“There’s too much of an obsession with privacy,” said Weyl to CoinDesk about the majority of people in the blockchain space. “Many have this notion of ‘I’m going to own my own data. I’m going to be able to sell it to whoever I want to sell it to.’”

Weyl argues:

“The problem with this is that it neglects a whole bunch of things that are important from the RadicalxChange perspective which is that almost any data about you is data about other people. So, should you be able to freely, independently totally just on your own sell it?”

Even on the matter of decentralization as a value, Weyl calls it a “mistake” to associate the term with individualism because in his view “individualism and extreme centralization are actually two sides of the same coin.”

“It’s the diversity of different collective organizations given that collective organization is necessary what I would call decentralization,” said Weyl.

In essence, Weyl maintains that at present “there’s no notion of an individual human being on a blockchain” and without formalizing human beings, the system is “fundamentally broken.”

Differences in organization

What’s more from an organizational standpoint, Weyl hopes to make a clear distinction between the way these two movements have started and will continue to progress.

“If you think about the ratio of people who became random billionaires to actual things [in the blockchain space] that are going on on the ground, it’s totally different between blockchain and RadicalxChange,” said Weyl. “There’s no people getting wildly wealthy off of RadicalxChange, but there is actual social change happening.

And while many in the blockchain space are focusing on achieving greater levels of adoption, Weyl argues that adoption is not at the forefront of the RadicalxChange agenda.

From left to right: Jeff Lee-Yaw, Ananya Chakravarti, Matt Prewitt, Jennifer Lyn Morone, and Mark Lutter. Executive director of the RadicalxChange Foundation Jeff Lee-Yaw moderates a panel with the four Foundation track leads about next steps for the movement.   

He told CoinDesk:

“This stuff is moving faster than I would have hoped that it would have moved. I don’t think the problem at this point is getting adoption. The problem is making sure that it happens at a pace that allows us to understand the flaws of the system and improve upon them.”

As such, from a technology and value-based standpoint, both Weyl and Buterin see differences that cause the blockchain movement and RadicalxChange movement to diverge.

“There’s some synergy between the two [movements] but it comes from different perspectives,” noted Rouviere to CoinDesk.

Despite differences, both movements, according to uPort’s Joshua Shane, are “calls to action” that possess highly similar cultures of experimentation and “reimagining how systems work in a plastic way.”

It is ultimately this mixed spirit of disenfranchisement and eagerness to find better solutions that makes these two communities align towards similar – not identical – goals.

Ethereum Foundation’s Eva Beylin told CoinDesk:

“Everyone’s a little disenfranchised from not only incumbents like banks but the incumbent ways of achieving objectives. All of these are very new ways of doing things so why not try them?’” 

Vitalik Buterin image via Christine Kim for CoinDesk

This news post is collected from CoinDesk

Recommended Read

Editor choice

BinBot Pro – Safest & Highly Recommended Binary Options Auto Trading Robot

Do you live in a country like USA or Canada where using automated trading systems is a problem? If you do then now we ...

9.5

Demo & Pro Version Try It Now

Read full review

The post The RadicalxChange Movement’s Crypto-Cypherpunk Appeal appeared first on Click 2 Watch.

More Details Here → https://click2.watch/the-radicalxchange-movements-crypto-cypherpunk-appeal-2

[click2watch]

The RadicalxChange Movement’s Crypto-Cypherpunk Appeal

Vitalik Buterin, Zooko Wilcox, Simon de la Rouviere, Santiago Siri – all are prominent leaders in the blockchain technology sector who regularly attend and speak at conferences around the world.

In this way, the RadicalxChange Conference in Detroit this weekend might not have seemed different than the many crypto conferences globally, but if its lineup bore similarities, the conversations did not. In place of discussions of crypto theory were serious talks on the social change needed to bring about and maximize the technology and its possible benefits.

It should be noted, however, that RadicalxChange was also not a “crypto conference.”

Put on by the RadicalxChange Foundation, this weekend’s event was rather the first mass gathering of individuals inspired by Glen Weyl and Eric Posner’s 2018 book “Radical Markets,” published by Princeton University Press.

“It struck a chord and found resonance with many people,” noted Jeff Lee-Yaw, executive director of the RadicalxChange Foundation in the event’s opening address. “[The book showed us that] we can reinvent institutions to fix problems like inequality, that we can find a way to build a more prosperous world.”

It’s this message that has seemed to resonate with those building new economies on cryptocurrencies and blockchains, as noted by Buterin in his keynote address.

There, the creator of ethereum explained his belief that movements to reinvent social order for the betterment of society at large are not unlike what certain communities in the blockchain and crypto space have been trying to do since the advent of bitcoin in 2009.

Buterin spoke at length about the similarities and differences between the cypherpunk movement and RadicalxChange movement, telling the audience:

“In general, there’s an interest in making the world better, a kind of idealism, an excitement about new ideas, and a commitment to not just thinking and talking but actively doing and experimenting and really many other commonalities.”

Slide from Vitalik Buterin’s keynote address.

To this, newly appointed co-leader of the RadicalxChange Foundation and former advisor to cryptocurrency investment firm Amentum, Matt Prewitt, couldn’t agree more.

“The connection is obvious in my mind,” said Prewitt to CoinDesk. “I got interested in ethereum and cryptocurrency because they are new tools for collaboration and collective action. It’s that kind of vision of more distributed power centers that attracted me to blockchain that I see [in RadicalxChange.]”

Giving life to ideas

Other speakers included director of growth at blockchain identity platform uPort Joshua Shane, Ethereum Foundation research fellow Eva Beylin, head of growth for crypto governance startup Commonwealth Labs Thom Ivy and co-founder of blockchain-backed cloud computing registry Wireline Lucas Geiger appear to agree.

Several RadicalxChange chapters across the U.S. were actually founded by those who otherwise work on blockchain projects. Joshua Shane in Seattle and Thom Ivy in Detroit are just two examples.

What’s more, many of the ideas being espoused by the RadicalxChange movement are being tested and experimented on blockchains.

Former developer for ConsenSys and founder of ethereum-based music software service Ujo Simon de la Rouviere launched last Thursday a blockchain art project implementing a version of the Harberger Tax promoted in the “Radical Markets” book.

The digital art piece is perpetually on sale and can be transferred to the hands of a higher bidder at any given moment in time. However, the owner of the piece must pay a 5 percent tax per annum on the price of that item.

“It would present some form of subsistence for the artist and some reasonable amount of knowledge of cash flow for the artist to continue creating more art,” Rouviere told CoinDesk.

Since launch, the art piece has changed hands three times and currently is worth 888 ETH or roughly $120,000. Still, Rouviere emphasized to CoinDesk that it was still too early to tell whether this method of art sale could be deemed entirely effective or not.

“This Artwork is Always on Sale” by Simon de la Rouviere.

The point is, however, that the design for experimentation was inspired by “Radical Markets.”

“When I read the book, I saw that a lot of the ideas could help the arts. I’ve always been a creator and the startups I’ve created have always been for creators,” said Rouviere.

This is by no means the only example of blockchain enthusiasts taking the ideas suggested in Weyl and Posner’s book to heart.

Another such idea experimented on by open-source bounties platform Gitcoin since as early as February is Capital-constrained Liberal Radicalism (CLR). CLR is based on a separate idea called quadratic voting presented in “Radical Markets” and iterated on in a paper written by Buterin, Weyl, and Harvard PhD student Zoë Hitzig.

In essence, the CLR mechanism suggests a way by which to optimally distribute a public goods fund such that fund distribution is “credibly mutual and not biased towards specific organizations,” as explained by Buterin in a past interview with Unchained podcast host Laura Shin.

The first CLR experiment hosted by Gitcoin distributed a total of $38,242 across 26 different projects in the ethereum space. As specified in a blog post, over 130 different individuals participated in this experiment.

It has since encouraged future rounds of CLR matching on Gitcoin, as well as greater interest in the ethereum community for inflation funding mechanisms such as the one proposed in ethereum improvement proposal 1789.

Ethereum Foundation research fellow Eva Beylin told CoinDesk:

“We’ve definitely had conversations with people adjacent to EF grants and even other kinds of grant programs like MolochDAO about the potential for them to experiment [with CLR].”

‘A natural set of allies’

To some extent, it could be argued that such experimentation and interest by folks at least within the ethereum community is due to the close collaboration and friendship between founder of ethereum Vitalik Buterin and author of “Radical Markets,” Glen Weyl.

But on a broader level, Joshua Shane, head of growth at ConsenSys-backed identity startup uPort, pointed out in a panel discussion that the crypto community in general “is much more open to new systems and much more open to changing the mechanisms of how we approach the world in ways the general population is not.”

“As such, they’re a natural set of allies,” Shane said during the panel. “Within a blockchain environment, you have a completely coherent economy and so you can reproduce a lot of the things experimentally that would otherwise happen in a perhaps damaging way out in the broader world.”

Ethereum especially is a blockchain “friendlier” to developers who seek to design such novel and untested applications, highlighted Rouviere to CoinDesk.

Even outside of being a testing grounds for ideas, Buterin argues the characteristics of blockchain as a distributed ledger has merits that can and most likely will in the future be helpful to implementing certain RadicalxChange ideas within society.

Speaking to CoinDesk, Buterin said:

“I see a lot of things like quadratic voting, Harberger tax and auctions, all of these systems as being based on top of blockchain because they’re just a convenient platform to do it.”

The main ‘wedge’ between the two

At the same time, there are key limitations and unanswered questions for blockchain both as a technology and social movement that Buterin noted creates a “wedge” between the two communities.

The main one is on the matter of identity. “Identity systems have a mix of different functions,” explained Buterin to CoinDesk.

On one hand, these systems would have to be able to associate ownership and action to a particular agent. Blockchain networks do this in a variety of ways as it relates to verifying the private keys of wallet addresses holding cryptocurrencies to a particular user.

“One other [function] is basically identifying between distinct people, between 10,000 real people and 10,000 sock puppets,” said Buterin. “The third kind of identity problem that I care about and that people don’t talk about as much is formalizing membership in communities.”

Buterin asked:

“How do you measure consensus? Is there a consensus for ProgPoW? Is there a consensus for fund recovery? Is there a consensus for implementing storage rent?”

All very real and contentious topics on the ethereum blockchain at present, Buterin concluded that building a multi-faceted identity system on a blockchain is very difficult and has not been solved yet.

And this is because the right data structure for a system of decentralized identity is fundamentally not on a blockchain, argues Weyl.

From left to right: Matt Prewitt, Jennifer Lyn Morone and Glen Weyl. Glen Weyl announces Matt Prewitt and Jennifer Lyn Morone as the new co-leads of the RadicalxChange Foundation. 

“The right data structure I increasingly think which [Microsoft researcher Nicole Immorlica] presented on is what I call an intersectional social data structure,” said Weyl to CoinDesk.

He elaborated:

“If you think about your mother’s date of birth that’s also your mother’s date of birth and it’s your grandmother’s date of birth of her first child. So there’s already a whole bunch of people for which that is an independently important piece of information. That’s true about pretty much everything about you.”

As such, a data structure flexible in design to host silos of personal data that are as Weyl puts “relational” and connected to many other stores of data in his mind would be a greater step in the right direction for building improved identity systems than a blockchain.

“The thing is the blockchain creates this polarization between the global chain and your private key. I think that is the fundamentally wrong primitive. I think the right primitive is a network or sort of overlapping community-based primitive,” said Weyl.

Differences in value

And while Buterin maintains that “blockchains can definitely be part of identity systems” in some capacity, both Buterin and Weyl recognize stark differences in the way identity systems are valued broadly within the blockchain movement and the RadicalxChange movement.

Vitalik Buterin on stage giving his keynote address at RadicalxChange 2019.

“There’s too much of an obsession with privacy,” said Weyl to CoinDesk about the majority of people in the blockchain space. “Many have this notion of ‘I’m going to own my own data. I’m going to be able to sell it to whoever I want to sell it to.’”

Weyl argues:

“The problem with this is that it neglects a whole bunch of things that are important from the RadicalxChange perspective which is that almost any data about you is data about other people. So, should you be able to freely, independently totally just on your own sell it?”

Even on the matter of decentralization as a value, Weyl calls it a “mistake” to associate the term with individualism because in his view “individualism and extreme centralization are actually two sides of the same coin.”

“It’s the diversity of different collective organizations given that collective organization is necessary what I would call decentralization,” said Weyl.

In essence, Weyl maintains that at present “there’s no notion of an individual human being on a blockchain” and without formalizing human beings, the system is “fundamentally broken.”

Differences in organization

What’s more from an organizational standpoint, Weyl hopes to make a clear distinction between the way these two movements have started and will continue to progress.

“If you think about the ratio of people who became random billionaires to actual things [in the blockchain space] that are going on on the ground, it’s totally different between blockchain and RadicalxChange,” said Weyl. “There’s no people getting wildly wealthy off of RadicalxChange, but there is actual social change happening.

And while many in the blockchain space are focusing on achieving greater levels of adoption, Weyl argues that adoption is not at the forefront of the RadicalxChange agenda.

From left to right: Jeff Lee-Yaw, Ananya Chakravarti, Matt Prewitt, Jennifer Lyn Morone, and Mark Lutter. Executive director of the RadicalxChange Foundation Jeff Lee-Yaw moderates a panel with the four Foundation track leads about next steps for the movement.   

He told CoinDesk:

“This stuff is moving faster than I would have hoped that it would have moved. I don’t think the problem at this point is getting adoption. The problem is making sure that it happens at a pace that allows us to understand the flaws of the system and improve upon them.”

As such, from a technology and value-based standpoint, both Weyl and Buterin see differences that cause the blockchain movement and RadicalxChange movement to diverge.

“There’s some synergy between the two [movements] but it comes from different perspectives,” noted Rouviere to CoinDesk.

Despite differences, both movements, according to uPort’s Joshua Shane, are “calls to action” that possess highly similar cultures of experimentation and “reimagining how systems work in a plastic way.”

It is ultimately this mixed spirit of disenfranchisement and eagerness to find better solutions that makes these two communities align towards similar – not identical – goals.

Ethereum Foundation’s Eva Beylin told CoinDesk:

“Everyone’s a little disenfranchised from not only incumbents like banks but the incumbent ways of achieving objectives. All of these are very new ways of doing things so why not try them?’” 

Vitalik Buterin image via Christine Kim for CoinDesk

This news post is collected from CoinDesk

Recommended Read

Editor choice

BinBot Pro – Safest & Highly Recommended Binary Options Auto Trading Robot

Do you live in a country like USA or Canada where using automated trading systems is a problem? If you do then now we ...

9.5

Demo & Pro Version Try It Now

Read full review

The post The RadicalxChange Movement’s Crypto-Cypherpunk Appeal appeared first on Click 2 Watch.

More Details Here → https://click2.watch/the-radicalxchange-movements-crypto-cypherpunk-appeal

[click2watch]

Understanding the RadicalxChange Movement And Its Cypherpunk Appeal

Vitalik Buterin, Zooko Wilcox, Simon de la Rouviere, Santiago Siri – all are prominent leaders in the blockchain technology sector who regularly attend and speak at conferences around the world.

In this way, the RadicalxChange Conference in Detroit this weekend might not have seemed different than the many crypto conferences globally, but if its lineup bore similarities, the conversations did not. In place of discussions of crypto theory were serious talks on the social change needed to bring about and maximize the technology and its possible benefits.

It should be noted, however, that RadicalxChange was also not a “crypto conference.”

Put on by the RadicalxChange Foundation, this weekend’s event was rather the first gathering of individuals inspired by Glen Weyl and Eric Posner’s 2018 book “Radical Markets,” published by Princeton University Press.

“It struck a chord and found resonance with many people,” noted Jeff Lee-Yaw, executive director of the RadicalxChange Foundation in the event’s opening address. “[The book showed us that] we can reinvent institutions to fix problems like inequality, that we can find a way to build a more prosperous world.”

It’s this message that has seemed to resonate with those building new economies on cryptocurrencies and blockchains, as noted by Buterin in his keynote address.

There, the creator of ethereum explained his belief that movements to reinvent social order for the betterment of society at large are not unlike what certain communities in the blockchain and crypto space have been trying to do since the advent of bitcoin in 2009.

Buterin spoke at length about the similarities and differences between the cypherpunk movement and RadicalxChange movement, telling the audience:

“In general, there’s an interest in making the world better, a kind of idealism, an excitement about new ideas, and a commitment to not just thinking and talking but actively doing and experimenting and really many other commonalities.”

Slide from Vitalik Buterin’s keynote address.

To this, newly appointed co-leader of the RadicalxChange Foundation and former advisor to cryptocurrency investment firm Amentum, Matt Prewitt, couldn’t agree more.

“The connection is obvious in my mind,” said Prewitt to CoinDesk. “I got interested in ethereum and cryptocurrency because they are new tools for collaboration and collective action. It’s that kind of vision of more distributed power centers that attracted me to blockchain that I see [in RadicalxChange.]”

Giving life to ideas

Other attendees including director of growth at blockchain identity platform uPort Joshua Shane, Ethereum Foundation research fellow Eva Beylin, head of growth for crypto governance startup Commonwealth Labs Thom Ivy and co-founder of blockchain-backed cloud computing registry Wireline Lucas Geiger appear to agree.

Several RadicalxChange chapters across the U.S. were actually founded by those who otherwise work on blockchain projects. Joshua Shane in Seattle and Thom Ivy in Detroit are just two examples.

What’s more, many of the ideas being espoused by the RadicalxChange movement are being tested and experimented on blockchains.

Former developer for ConsenSys and founder of ethereum-based music software service Ujo Simon de la Rouviere launched last Thursday a blockchain art project implementing a version of the Harberger Tax promoted in the “Radical Markets” book.

The digital art piece is perpetually on sale and can be transferred to the hands of a higher bidder at any given moment in time. However, the owner of the piece must pay a 5 percent tax per annum on the price of that item.

“It would present some form of subsistence for the artist and some reasonable amount of knowledge of cash flow for the artist to continue creating more art,” Rouviere told CoinDesk.

Since launch, the art piece has changed hands three times and currently is worth 888 ETH or roughly $120,000. Still, Rouviere emphasized to CoinDesk that it was still too early to tell whether this method of art sale could be deemed entirely effective or not.

“This Artwork is Always on Sale” by Simon de la Rouviere.

The point is, however, that the design for experimentation was inspired by “Radical Markets.”

“When I read the book, I saw that a lot of the ideas could help the arts. I’ve always been a creator and the startups I’ve created have always been for creators,” said Rouviere.

This is by no means the only example of blockchain enthusiasts taking the ideas suggested in Weyl and Posner’s book to heart.

Another such idea experimented on by open-source bounties platform Gitcoin since as early as February is Capital-constrained Liberal Radicalism (CLR). CLR is based on a separate idea called quadratic voting presented in “Radical Markets” and iterated on in a paper written by Buterin, Weyl, and Harvard PhD student Zoë Hitzig.

In essence, the CLR mechanism suggests a way by which to optimally distribute a public goods fund such that fund distribution is “credibly mutual and not biased towards specific organizations,” as explained by Buterin in a past interview with Unchained podcast host Laura Shin.

The first CLR experiment hosted by Gitcoin distributed a total of $38,242 across 26 different projects in the ethereum space. As specified in a blog post, over 130 different individuals participated in this experiment.

It has since encouraged future rounds of CLR matching on Gitcoin, as well as greater interest in the ethereum community for inflation funding mechanisms such as the one proposed in ethereum improvement proposal 1789.

Ethereum Foundation research fellow Eva Beylin told CoinDesk:

“We’ve definitely had conversations with people adjacent to EF grants and even other kinds of grant programs like MolechDAO about the potential for them to experiment [with CLR].”

‘A natural set of allies’

To some extent, it could be argued that such experimentation and interest by folks at least within the ethereum community is due to the close collaboration and friendship between founder of ethereum Vitalik Buterin and author of “Radical Markets,” Glen Weyl.

But on a broader level, Joshua Shane, head of growth at ConsenSys-backed identity startup uPort, pointed out in a panel discussion that the crypto community in general “is much more open to new systems and much more open to changing the mechanisms of how we approach the world in ways the general population is not.”

“As such, they’re a natural set of allies,” Shane said during the panel. “Within a blockchain environment, you have a completely coherent economy and so you can reproduce a lot of the things experimentally that would otherwise happen in a perhaps damaging way out in the broader world.”

Ethereum especially is a blockchain “friendlier” to developers who seek to design such novel and untested applications, highlighted Rouviere to CoinDesk.

Even outside of being a testing grounds for ideas, Buterin argues the characteristics of blockchain as a distributed ledger has merits that can and most likely will in the future be helpful to implementing certain RadicalxChange ideas within society.

Speaking to CoinDesk, Buterin said:

“I see a lot of things like quadratic voting, Harberger tax and auctions, all of these systems as being based on top of blockchain because they’re just a convenient platform to do it.”

The main ‘wedge’ between the two

At the same time, there are key limitations and unanswered questions for blockchain both as a technology and social movement that Buterin noted creates a “wedge” between the two communities.

The main one is on the matter of identity. “Identity systems have a mix of different functions,” explained Buterin to CoinDesk.

On one hand, these systems would have to be able to associate ownership and action to a particular agent. Blockchain networks do this in a variety of ways as it relates to verifying the private keys of wallet addresses holding cryptocurrencies to a particular user.

“One other [function] is basically identifying between distinct people, between 10,000 real people and 10,000 sock puppets,” said Buterin. “The third kind of identity problem that I care about and that people don’t talk about as much is formalizing membership in communities.”

Buterin asked:

“How do you measure consensus? Is there a consensus for ProgPoW? Is there a consensus for fund recovery? Is there a consensus for implementing storage rent?”

All very real and contentious topics on the ethereum blockchain at present, Buterin concluded that building a multi-faceted identity system on a blockchain is very difficult and has not been solved yet.

And this is because the right data structure for a system of decentralized identity is fundamentally not on a blockchain, argues Weyl.

From left to right: Matt Prewitt, Jennifer Lyn Morone and Glen Weyl. Glen Weyl announces Matt Prewitt and Jennifer Lyn Morone as the new co-leads of the RadicalxChange Foundation. 

“The right data structure I increasingly think which [Microsoft researcher Nicole Immorlica] presented on is what I call an intersectional social data structure,” said Weyl to CoinDesk.

He elaborated:

“If you think about your mother’s date of birth that’s also your mother’s date of birth and it’s your grandmother’s date of birth of her first child. So there’s already a whole bunch of people for which that is an independently important piece of information. That’s true about pretty much everything about you.”

As such, a data structure flexible in design to host silos of personal data that are as Weyl puts “relational” and connected to many other stores of data in his mind would be a greater step in the right direction for building improved identity systems than a blockchain.

“The thing is the blockchain creates this polarization between the global chain and your private key. I think that is the fundamentally wrong primitive. I think the right primitive is a network or sort of overlapping community-based primitive,” said Weyl.

Differences in value

And while Buterin maintains that “blockchains can definitely be part of identity systems” in some capacity, both Buterin and Weyl recognize stark differences in the way identity systems are valued broadly within the blockchain movement and the RadicalxChange movement.

Vitalik Buterin on stage giving his keynote address at RadicalxChange 2019.

“There’s too much of an obsession with privacy,” said Weyl to CoinDesk about the majority of people in the blockchain space. “Many have this notion of ‘I’m going to own my own data. I’m going to be able to sell it to whoever I want to sell it to.’”

Weyl argues:

“The problem with this is that it neglects a whole bunch of things that are important from the RadicalxChange perspective which is that almost any data about you is data about other people. So, should you be able to freely, independently totally just on your own sell it?”

Even on the matter of decentralization as a value, Weyl calls it a “mistake” to associate the term with individualism because in his view “individualism and extreme centralization are actually two sides of the same coin.”

“It’s the diversity of different collective organizations given that collective organization is necessary what I would call decentralization,” said Weyl.

In essence, Weyl maintains that at present “there’s no notion of an individual human being on a blockchain” and without formalizing human beings, the system is “fundamentally broken.”

Differences in organization

What’s more from an organizational standpoint, Weyl hopes to make a clear distinction between the way these two movements have started and will continue to progress.

“If you think about the ratio of people who became random billionaires to actual things [in the blockchain space] that are going on on the ground, it’s totally different between blockchain and RadicalxChange,” said Weyl. “There’s no people getting wildly wealthy off of RadicalxChange, but there is actual social change happening.

And while many in the blockchain space are focusing on achieving greater levels of adoption, Weyl argues that adoption is not at the forefront of the RadicalxChange agenda.

From left to right: Jeff Lee-Yaw, Ananya Chakravarti, Matt Prewitt, Jennifer Lyn Morone, and Mark Lutter. Executive director of the RadicalxChange Foundation Jeff Lee-Yaw moderates a panel with the four Foundation track leads about next steps for the movement.   

He told CoinDesk:

“This stuff is moving faster than I would have hoped that it would have moved. I don’t think the problem at this point is getting adoption. The problem is making sure that it happens at a pace that allows us to understand the flaws of the system and improve upon them.”

As such, from a technology and value-based standpoint, both Weyl and Buterin see differences that cause the blockchain movement and RadicalxChange movement to diverge.

“There’s some synergy between the two [movements] but it comes from different perspectives,” noted Rouviere to CoinDesk.

Despite differences, both movements, according to uPort’s Joshua Shane, are “calls to action” that possess highly similar cultures of experimentation and “reimagining how systems work in a plastic way.”

It is ultimately this mixed spirit of disenfranchisement and eagerness to find better solutions that makes these two communities align towards similar – not identical – goals.

Ethereum Foundation’s Eva Beylin told CoinDesk:

“Everyone’s a little disenfranchised from not only incumbents like banks but the incumbent ways of achieving objectives. All of these are very new ways of doing things so why not try them?’” 

Vitalik Buterin image via Christine Kim for CoinDesk

This news post is collected from CoinDesk

Recommended Read

Editor choice

BinBot Pro – Safest & Highly Recommended Binary Options Auto Trading Robot

Do you live in a country like USA or Canada where using automated trading systems is a problem? If you do then now we ...

9.5

Demo & Pro Version Try It Now

Read full review

The post Understanding the RadicalxChange Movement And Its Cypherpunk Appeal appeared first on Click 2 Watch.

More Details Here → https://click2.watch/understanding-the-radicalxchange-movement-and-its-cypherpunk-appeal