We'll be having soon our 6th BarCampBankFlashMeeting on
Tuesday March 20, 2007 - 9:00pm CET, 8:00pm UK Time, 4:00pm EDT.
Agenda: ----------- Subject | Length | Comments
1) Introduction | 10 minutes | to get everyone connected and ready
2) P2PMoney | 60 minutes | discussion on how we could organize an open project for a pooled payment and revenue system see P2PMoney for prior-discussion
3) Next steps | at least 10 minutes | before end of the 1:30 hour booked we will be listing action items for getting the thing going
We exchanged on the workflows that we would like to be implemented by a P2PMoney system and agreed that we do not see this implemented in any of the tools we see close enough to the concept (Fundable, billMonk,..). In particular, the decision engine (see http://barcampbank.googlegroups.com/web/P2PMoney+High-level+architect...) seems to be very specific to what we want to achieve (possibility to prioritize expenses, measure contributions of group members, vote for expenses, decide transfer shares of a common revenue stream,..), but we agreed that we should investigate the different existing tools to see what already exist, can be re-used or used in place of.
The following next steps have been agreed upon:
1) we will investigate the existing solution in the perspective of the workflows we have described
2) we will report findings and analyses on a Survey page
3) we will build a one-page presentation of the P2PMoney project that can be publicize
4) we will be contact people from coworking (Tara Hunt, Chris Messina,..) and open-source projects (Drupal,..) and get their feedback on the concepts
An important function that I just thought of for the transaction engine of this system is the ability to exchange between P2P money applications.
For instance, if Barcampbank and another project were both using this P2P money tool, and we wanted to pay money to them. This might be trickier than paying out to, or taking money in from paypal or visa, or bank accounts.
Although, a special function could be set up that would pass commands between the two applications, so that the system would calculate all of the individual transactions coming out of one group, then calculate all of the individual payments to be made to the receiving group.
It will be interesting to talk to some people inolved in programming ecommerce tools to see how transactions are currently typically handled. Zen Cart community might be worth talking to as well.
> We exchanged on the workflows that we would like to be implemented by > a P2PMoney system and agreed that we do not see this implemented in > any of the tools we see close enough to the concept (Fundable, > billMonk,..). In particular, the decision engine (seehttp://barcampbank.googlegroups.com/web/P2PMoney+High-level+architect...) > seems to be very specific to what we want to achieve (possibility to > prioritize expenses, measure contributions of group members, vote for > expenses, decide transfer shares of a common revenue stream,..), but > we agreed that we should investigate the different existing tools to > see what already exist, can be re-used or used in place of.
> The following next steps have been agreed upon:
> 1) we will investigate the existing solution in the perspective of the > workflows we have described
> 2) we will report findings and analyses on a Survey page
> 3) we will build a one-page presentation of the P2PMoney project that > can be publicize
> 4) we will be contact people from coworking (Tara Hunt, Chris > Messina,..) and open-source projects (Drupal,..) and get their > feedback on the concepts
I think that the question looks very much like the typical bank compensation system: banks do not do transfer between on every transfering orders but wait the end of the month to aggregate the transfers and exchange only the difference.
I think that two P2PMoney platforms that agree on a compensation schedule will still use PayPal or another external vendor to perform the actual transfer. This implies of course a certain level of trust between the two and is put in place to lower the fees incurred by multiple transactions going through PayPal.
The question of compensation between groups on the same platform is though a possible feature that it could be interesting to anticipate. I think that compensation within a group could be a good V1.0 and compensation between groups could come as a V2.0. What do you think?
I'm interested in doing and Organized Inquiry as step 2 in "what do we do next" see: http://www.communitywiki.org/odd/CollectiveProblemSolving/OrganizedIn... around this before we really get into the nuts and bolts design, so that we can see what the nuts and bolts of related tools look like.
To do this, we would frame our research around contenxtualizing questions and then pull and contextualize information from multiple sources to answer it. I'll create an OrganizedInquiry page for P2P money on the BarCampBank wiki site, and copy it here under it's own subject. we can aggregate it all into a kind of Whitepaper report, with reference to sources.
So, one contenxtualizing question is:
"What currently exists that resembles our P2P money requirements at , and how does it actually work?"
We can also add any other questions we have about this. But, I think rsearchign around questions will help focus our research, and will help us develop publication quality pages by summarizing that focused research. Sound good?
In other news, I've also joined the Pay Pal developers network, and have access to a pay pal sandbox for testing out code, which we can use eventually.
> I think that the question looks very much like the typical bank > compensation system: banks do not do transfer between on every > transfering orders but wait the end of the month to aggregate the > transfers and exchange only the difference.
> I think that two P2PMoney platforms that agree on a compensation > schedule will still use PayPal or another external vendor to perform > the actual transfer. This implies of course a certain level of trust > between the two and is put in place to lower the fees incurred by > multiple transactions going through PayPal.
> The question of compensation between groups on the same platform is > though a possible feature that it could be interesting to anticipate. > I think that compensation within a group could be a good V1.0 and > compensation between groups could come as a V2.0. What do you think?
In my mind, the one-pager was maybe step 3, i.e. using the results of your search to validate what we think P2PMoney is about. Also, I don't know if we have a one-pager that is sufficiently explicit to outsiders to use it right now. I started a page on this workgroup http://groups.google.com/group/barcampbank/web/p2pmoney-one-pager to start the refinement process. Sam, I see that you worked on the wiki page. We can coordinate what should be the "official" one, or just copy the final information in both places.
For "searching and investigating solutions", I didn't know OrganizedInquiry, but that could indeed be a useful help.
For "surveying and reviewing", I've also created a page on this group http://groups.google.com/group/barcampbank/web/p2pmoney-industry-watch It is still rather blank, but I was thinking of reporting some review of PayPal after having given a more thorough look at their different solutions (like mass-payments). Again, we can have it in both places (wiki and this group), if that's more convenient.
I agree that starting discussing P2PMoney on coworking's thread is a good thing.
Ok. Maybe we can explicitly lay out what the next steps are, so that we can all get on the same page? maybe you can list what the next steps are as you see them, just for clarification purposes.
On Mar 22, 11:19 am, "Frederic Baud" <fredericb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> In my mind, the one-pager was maybe step 3, i.e. using the results of > your search to validate what we think P2PMoney is about. Also, I don't > know if we have a one-pager that is sufficiently explicit to outsiders > to use it right now. I started a page on this workgrouphttp://groups.google.com/group/barcampbank/web/p2pmoney-one-pagerto > start the refinement process. Sam, I see that you worked on the wiki > page. We can coordinate what should be the "official" one, or just > copy the final information in both places.
> For "searching and investigating solutions", I didn't know > OrganizedInquiry, but that could indeed be a useful help.
> For "surveying and reviewing", I've also created a page on this grouphttp://groups.google.com/group/barcampbank/web/p2pmoney-industry-watch > It is still rather blank, but I was thinking of reporting some review > of PayPal after having given a more thorough look at their different > solutions (like mass-payments). Again, we can have it in both places > (wiki and this group), if that's more convenient.
> I agree that starting discussing P2PMoney on coworking's thread is a > good thing.
Hi Sam, ok, I thought you were referring to the numbering of the steps I summarized at the begining of this thread.
I've copied them below.
I agree that we may not have to wait step 4 to start discussing on coworking forums. But we may start to feed the page "surveying and reviewing" right now and refine the one-pager along the way. What do you think?
On Mar 22, 11:19 am, "Frederic Baud" <fredericb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> In my mind, the one-pager was maybe step 3, i.e. using the results of > your search to validate what we think P2PMoney is about. Also, I don't > know if we have a one-pager that is sufficiently explicit to outsiders > to use it right now. I started a page on this workgrouphttp://groups.google.com/group/barcampbank/web/p2pmoney-one-pagerto > start the refinement process. Sam, I see that you worked on the wiki > page. We can coordinate what should be the "official" one, or just > copy the final information in both places.
Also, it's cool with me if we copy the final drafts to both places. That way, people can use either set of web tools. A little extra work, but not a big deal and worthwhile for maybe getting expanded participation.
> For "searching and investigating solutions", I didn't know > OrganizedInquiry, but that could indeed be a useful help.
Right now, all we have to do is think about what our questions are to help focus our research. What are the questions we ar asking right now?
We can add as many questions as you want. although, we can just work with this one question for now if it is enough. Then we can search for answers in context of these questions.
I plan on asking my linkedin network, and other question asking services, and I plan on creating tags that relate to questions for ma.gnolia and del.ico.us, and asking people to tag things they fnd related to this there, too. Plus, we can ask the same questions on different discussion groups and forums, and then summarize the answers we get on the wiki, and copy that over to pages we create here in the google group. Plus, we can create a discussion topic here around each question, and summarize that discussion on the wiki/copy it here. We can also pose the question to different wiki communities with knowledge in this area, and ask them to co-create a page that answers these questions, and include a rework of those pages. We can also keep our own survey and review page as we are already doing, of course.
In the end, we will have questions, and summaries of answers, along with links to the sources where those answers came from. We can then refine this into a white-paper-type of publication/report about our findings.
Lion Kimbro might also possibly (hopefully) swing by here and offer some input about doign an Organized Inquiry. He is the original inventor of the idea.
I am willing to tend to and coordinate this project over time on behalf of BarCampBank.
> For "surveying and reviewing", I've also created a page on this grouphttp://groups.google.com/group/barcampbank/web/p2pmoney-industry-watch > It is still rather blank, but I was thinking of reporting some review > of PayPal after having given a more thorough look at their different > solutions (like mass-payments). Again, we can have it in both places > (wiki and this group), if that's more convenient.
> I agree that starting discussing P2PMoney on coworking's thread is a > good thing.
On Mar 22, 11:50 am, "Frederic Baud" <fredericb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Sam, ok, I thought you were referring to the numbering of the steps > I summarized at the begining of this thread.
> I've copied them below.
Cool, I agree with all of them.
> I agree that we may not have to wait step 4 to start discussing on > coworking forums. But we may start to feed the page "surveying and > reviewing" right now and refine the one-pager along the way. What do > you think?
I agree, we should start filling in the surveying and reviewing, although, I also propose that we combine surveyign and review with specific organized inquiry questions. A great thing about contextualizing our research into questions is that the questions give us a vehicle to immediately start talking to different communities by asking them these questions. Do you think this will work for P2P money project?
> 1) we will investigate the existing solution in the perspective of > the > workflows we have described
> 2) we will report findings and analyses on a Survey page
> 3) we will build a one-page presentation of the P2PMoney project that > can be publicize
> 4) we will be contact people from coworking (Tara Hunt, Chris > Messina,..) and open-source projects (Drupal,..) and get their > feedback on the concepts
