Milestone 2 - Pay day !!

[Tiberius Brastaviceanu]

Hi all, 

I did a calculation for the distribution for Milestone 2. I did it in the spreadsheet, since the value equation engine cannot support the way data was logged, for this budgeted project, a forward-looking value equation. We haven't reached the level of abstraction that can support all the different use cases with the Value Equation. More conceptual work needs to be done... 

So, here are the results. 

Daniel	$1,103.33
Ahmed	$865.39
Jim	$1,295.56
Tibi	$783.23
John	$99.67
Thomas	$420.54
Abran	$57.27
Maria	$138.29
Adam	$72.62
Tammy	$164.09
	$5,000.00

See my calculations in the spreadsheet. 

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1YNgwrjoOQgGWGP3QJbNrfgFbSKue1FCgeQdFdlUsBVg/edit#gid=2044565645 

Please check to see if everything is OK. There are places where I do proofs... If you can't follow the calculation I can help you understand. 

Thank you all for your collaboration. 

NOTE: We need to deliver as fast as we can. There are another 10K that we can get from this project! 

Don't forget to continue to do outreach to get more participation. 

[Tammy Lea Meyer]

Please apply my earnings to fund the infrastructure of Sensorica, as well as the remaining funds not disbursed from the last milestone. I would like to have that reflected in the VAS; what are the options for how this can be tracked and allocated in the system?

Tam

--
Go to SENSORICA home
https://sites.google.com/site/sensoricahome/home
Go to our Working Space
https://sites.google.com/site/sensoricahome/home/working-space
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to SENSORICA group.
To post to this group, send email to Sens...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
Sensorica+...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/Sensorica?hl=en?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SENSORICA" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Sensorica+...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

Tammy Lea Meyer

778.898.7855

Affiliate with SENSORICA

Project co-lead: #myvoicematters

I'm motivated to dream big, and support change by creating tools and processes for collaboratively telling our own stories.

We change the world, one action at a time. 

I acknowledge and honour the fact that I was born, live, and do my work on unceded indigenous territory.

[Tiberius Brastaviceanu]

As Jim pointed out, Daniel has programming hours?!

This is a logging mistake by Daniel. you can catch that in the Milestone 2 sheet I will correct it in the NRP

9/15/2015	Daniel	PV characterization	Programming for product
9/15/2015	Daniel	PV characterization	Programming for product

I will make the changes now. 

--

Go to SENSORICA home
https://sites.google.com/site/sensoricahome/home
Go to our Working Space
https://sites.google.com/site/sensoricahome/home/working-space
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to SENSORICA group.
To post to this group, send email to Sens...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
Sensorica+...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/Sensorica?hl=en?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SENSORICA" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Sensorica+...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

t!b! 

co-founder of SENSORICA, 

an open, decentralized and self-organizing

value network (an open enterprise)

founder of Multitude Project

Google Profile

Facebook Tiberius Brastaviceanu

Twitter  @TiberiusB

[Lynn Foster]

Tammy,

I can walk you through how to contribute your distributions back to Sensorica if you like.  We added that feature based on feedback from the last distribution, but I don't think anyone has tried it yet.  We'll have to wait until the actual distribution happens in NRP so your funds will be in your virtual account.

Briefly,  you can do this by doing a Cash Contribution on the Supply page, and choosing to take it from your virtual account at the bottom of the popup window.  You should also be able to earmark your contribution where you like.  This can be done by targeting an existing or new virtual account, or if you want to be more specific, you can also say what you would like in the comments.

But let's do it together once your virtual account has been updated, ping me!

Lynn

[Tammy Lea Meyer]

Thank you Lynn!

Tam

[Maria Frangos]

Thanks, I will do the same!

[Tammy Lea Meyer]

Yay! that's $300 towards October.... not nothin'. ;)

Tam

[Lynn Foster]

​>I did a calculation for the distribution for Milestone 2. I did it in the spreadsheet, since the value equation engine cannot support the way data was logged, for this budgeted project, a forward-looking value equation. We haven't reached the level of abstraction that can support all the different use cases with the Value Equation. More conceptual work needs to be done...

I'm curious - What makes you think the value equation can't support the way the data was logged?  It worked fine for the first distribution.  I know of no reason it won't work for the second.  It is only a question of what percentages are chosen for the buckets - the original estimates ("forward looking") or the re-calculated actuals, and the logic is the same for the value equation, it doesn't care.  You have divided the buckets more finely this time, but that is easily handled by the type of work filter.  Am I missing something?  (I haven't dissected your spreadsheet calculations in detail.)

I think it is still a good idea to do the spreadsheet and the NRP distribution in parallel though, as it is only the second run for Sensorica on distributing income, and this would be general best practice for a major new function like the value equation.

I put in a couple test equations, as I wasn't initially clear what percentages you wanted to use.  Once your data is corrected, I'd like to experiment and see if we have differences, and if so, what is the cause.

--
Go to SENSORICA's project page
http://www.sensorica.co/home/what-we-do/projects/pv-characterization
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PV characterization project forum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to pv-characterization-pr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to pv-characterizat...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pv-characterization-project-forum.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/pv-characterization-project-forum/CAH3XNQ%2BjOgDe9rSMwQoWNC%2BhX6sA4PrN3Typ2PeNtYz4qdCs1Q%40mail.gmail.com.

[Tiberius Brastaviceanu]

We can select processes for inputing data into 

[Tiberius Brastaviceanu]

Lynn, we can select specific processes to input time contributions data into the value equation, but we can't go further, to select specific work types within a specific process. 

In the milestone 1, we put all the R&D into one bucket, electronics, software and mechanics, because they had the same $/h rate. Milestone 2 is different, we need to consider these differently, and they were logged in the same process. 

[Lynn Foster]

Tibi, check my test value equation PVC M2 test 2 - the types of work are defined on the bucket rules as filters by resource type. 

There are two levels of filtering, one that is defined more permanently in the value equation, meant for things that could apply over and over to many distributions, and there is the process or work order or deliverable selection that happens at "run time" because the nature of those selections is that they will always change.  No matter which level a filter is defined or entered, they are combined when the distribution is run.  It is an AND for the geeks among us.

(You are defining a new value equation each time because of the % estimates applied to the buckets, which is fine, but originally the thought was that projects would define a value equation and use if for much of their work.  It works either way.)

[Tiberius Brastaviceanu]

Hi Lynn, I don't get the same results when I run it in the sandbox.

I can verify my calculations in the spreadsheet again. I essentially modified the calculation for Milestone 1, which was tested quite a lot. But I can't say that it's perfect.. I'll do my part.

A few months ago we had a discussion about the transparency of the value equation, the way it is implemented in the NRP-VAS. I don't know what goes on mathematically, behind these lists and the filters. Therefore, it is impossible for me to formally compare the one in the NRP with the one on the spreadsheet, the later is transparent, because you can access the code in each cell. Not getting the same answer tells us that they are not the same. There might be an error in the spreadsheet, but I can't go into the one in the NRP.

I think we need a math editor in NRP, at the UI level, when we build the value equation, and we need to renter the algorithm to everyone, once a value equation is implemented.

See the value equation agreement for the project. At the end of this doc you have the mathematical algorithm for calculating distributions. This is what I implemented in the spreadsheet. See if you are doing the same in the code. Perhaps get another programmer's advice, or second opinion... Once you render/surface the algorithm from the value equation I can tell if they are formally similar. If you need more clarification on this, I can help. I do have some ideas about how to render the formalism from your code.

IF YOU ARE INTERESTED IN THE VALUE EQUATION

To shed some light on the problem in this case,
Bob and Lynn, you can correct me

We need to filter the data that goes into the value equation grinder.
From the database, we apply the first filter, the Project.

After that, we need to make sure which Process within the project is concerned.

Within these processes we have Types of work (documentation, R&D electronics, mechanics, etc.)

In the PV project, portions of the budget are allocated to Processes (Outreach, Coordination and Facilitation, Prototyping) and the value equation assigns weights to Types of work (electronics, mechanics, software).
 
After this filtering is done, we need to place the data into different components of the value equation algorithm, which should be formally sound. This part is totally obscure for the user, including those who have admin access, like myself, I think it is hard codded.

IF YOU ARE INTERESTED IN THE LARGER DISCUSSION ABOUT VALUE EQUATION, -- HIGHER LEVEL

Thoughts for an increased level of abstraction, cover more cases and make it more flexible

In the very beginning I proposed the Activity ---> Role system

The idea was that a Role is a cluster of Activities.

Activities can be: writing, reading, experimental work, manual work, meeting, communicating, etc.

A Role is any cluster of those.

Example: Role/Administration = {writing, reading, meeting, ...}

In order to structure activities and roles, I proposed to use an ontology.
The Activity ---> Role system would be emergent.

Roles would be used in value equations.

Bob rejected the ontology idea and went simple with Type of work. So we have Projects, Processes and Types of work. But there is a problem here, because there is no distinction between activities and roles any more. I can do writing, or documentation in different contexts: R&D or as part of administration, etc. In other words, I can do the same activity in different roles. In the context of the same project, multiple people can log documentation in different roles. Should all documentation work be rewarded the same way? Most people will say NO, because technical documentation requires different skills than administrative documentation.

At this moment, Documentation is a Type of work, and it becomes harder to distinguish on the type of documentation in order to reward it differently. If the value equation runs on Roles, it becomes more flexible.

[Bob Haugen]

I see at least three sets of issues in this message (below) and would like to separate them for discussion, and give them accurate subject headings.

1. Discrepancy of results between Lynn's value equation and Tibi's spreadsheet, which seems the easiest to resolve.

2. Transparency of the value equations in NRP and spreadsheets, or value equation math in general, which is a bigger topic.

3. Tibi's Role ontology, which is an even bigger topic, as I hope will become clear.

Is it ok with everybody to separate these?  If so, I propose that we start a separate email thread for the first one, and start Loomio threads for the other two. If anybody else sees any other issues, or wants to separate them differently, please go for it. 

Lynn is looking into the discrepancy, but has some other work to finish up first, so she'll kick off that thread when she gets to it. I can start the Loomio threads by tomorrow morning latest, unless somebody else wants to do it first.

P.S. I think each of these issues is very interesting and may shed light on some other as-yet unresolved issues. You gotta get ready to understand the details in each case, though.

[Tiberius Brastaviceanu]

Thanks for separating these issues Bob. 

1. might require some programming, we might not be able to solve it with the filtering methods we have now. 

I can help with 2. I think you can associate a mathematical or logical expression to every piece of code that executes a portion of the algorithm, and pull these expression and assemble them into a larger expression that represents the algorithm, once the value equation is completed. We don't need to respect mathematical notations with all these strange characters. Something like the formulas in spreadsheets. For example a notation like:

Amount - Sum(Filter_and(data, criterion 1, criterion 2, ...) * parameter)

 

[Bob Haugen]

By 1, I mean *only* the discrepancies between Lynn's value equation and your spreadsheet, which she is digging into now, but it's a lot of work.

[Tiberius Brastaviceanu]

Understood. My idea is that it might not be possible to map the value equation formula from the spreadsheet into the NRP-VAS without extra programming. It all depends on the flexibility of the crunching engine behind the value equation in the NRP-VAS. Spreadsheets are pretty versatile already... 

[Bob Haugen]

Let's wait and see.

[Tiberius Brastaviceanu]

I just want to acknowledge Tammy and Maria, who decided to contribute their gains to maintain SENSORICA's infrastructure. 

Thank you! 

[John CC]

I'd like to reinvest my share back into Sensorica as well. It's not much but every bit helps.

My preferred choice would be to invest it into getting PCBs printed for the eCG project, because that's a project I'm passionate about and my latest shield based eCG dev kit prototype is ready to be turned into PCBs (at least into version 1).

Getting PCBs printed is the next step to take the eCG project from prototype to production.

If Sensorica desperately needs funds for infrastructure I'm happy to put it directly towards that instead.

[Tiberius Brastaviceanu]

Thank you John. 

Thomas left 127.89$ from his payment for SENSORICA infrastructure development and maintenance. 

Tammy left 164.09$ for Infrastructure development.

Maria left 276.12$  for Infrastructure development

I recorded it in the Accounting for SENSORICA spreadsheet.

Next steps: 

Run the Value Equation in the NRP, in order to transfer $ from CAKE's main account to everyone's virtual account. Lynn can show you all who to transfer these sums individually into the proper account. 

For infrastructure development and maintenance the account is Building SENSORICA

For the ECG it will be transferred to this project's account, to be used to buy parts, according to a group decision. 

Update the data on the Dashboard of SENSORICA once we do all the transactions properly in the NRP. [I export financial contributions in a CSV file and put them in the spreadsheet embedded on this page]

[Tiberius Brastaviceanu]

Forgot to link to the  Accounting for SENSORICA spreadsheet

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1iZVrbSSYtIb1kHPk9ouQfWms9v9yVeX7JjwnMgPy5j4/edit#gid=0 

[Tammy Lea Meyer]

Hey Tibi--

Thanks for making the calculations. I'd also like to add the remainder in my 'wallet', somewhere in the neighbourhood of $20 to infrastructure.

Tam

[Tiberius Brastaviceanu]

Perfect, I updated the spreadsheet with transactions from Milestone 2. 

I also longed in there recent contributions through Paypal 

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1iZVrbSSYtIb1kHPk9ouQfWms9v9yVeX7JjwnMgPy5j4/edit#gid=0 

For the NRP part, I would like you to do an exercise with Lynn about how you can transfer 32.68 from your virtual account to the Building SENSORICA account.  

Also, you can learn how you can log 5$ contribution through PayPalm for infrastructure development. 

Your experience and feedback will help improve the system. 

[Tiberius Brastaviceanu]

I created a HELP document for Cash contributions. 

NOTE that there are 2 cases: 

1. input money from an external source
   
2. transfer money from your virtual account - source of this are paid projects

I documented the first case. 

Here we are concerned with the second case. 

Lynn created a way to address the second case, but I can't find the documentation for it, I don't know how to do it. I invite Lynn to complete the second section in the document. 

I also left some notes about how to improve all this. Please provide your feedback too. 

I linked to this help doc from the Procedures page on the website. 

 

[Lynn Foster]

I updated the document - basically there is a checkbox at the bottom of the popup window where you can designate to take from your virtual account.  And I added to the improvement notes.  So, contributors, please let me know if something is not clear or if you just want someone to walk you through it anyhow.

[Tiberius Brastaviceanu]

Hi Lynn, I can't identify that check box. could you please take a screen shot and display it here? 

[Tammy Lea Meyer]

Thanks Lynn and Tibi for your work in making the work flow easier to navigate. 

I think I've successfully transferred the contents of my digital wallet as a cash contribution to sensorica infrastructure. See pic for result. 

I would note my monthly contribution is not reflected in the total: shall I note that as well, or is there an easier way to do that as an automated thing?

Tam

[Tiberius Brastaviceanu]

Not sure that this is correct... I think you created a cash contribution from an external source to a virtual account. 

I realize how problematic this can be... Anyone can do the same and appear as if they have invested in all sorts of things. 

We need a checking mechanism before this type of transaction goes through. This can rely on a proof - either a Paypal payment receipt, of a back transfer receipt, or something like that, verified by peers and perhaps by CAKE administrators, once the physical transaction of completed.  Fact checking before people the system takes ins for cash. 

[Tiberius Brastaviceanu]

The UI should require the affiliate who records cash contribution from external source to provide a document that can be used for fact checking. Without this piece of information the system should not proceed to the next step. 

Once the process is completed by the affiliate the system should be in standby until a CAKE admin can verify the fact, i.e. the money is there. 

[Tammy Lea Meyer]

Yes, it would have been great to have been able to view my wallet, I pored through this thread and saw that you had calculated the remainder in my wallet from Milestone 1, and just added those two numbers together.

Tam

[Lynn Foster]

Everyone, please wait for this until the distribution is made!!!!

[Tammy Lea Meyer]

Sorry lynn! I thought we were being directed to take action. ☺

Tam

[Lynn Foster]

Sorry Tammy, I guess we are in a state of confusion, as a group, today.   I certainly can't keep up!

So, Maria and I just walked through her contributing her cash back to Sensorica.  Only her M1 money was in her virtual account, so we contributed that. 

Tammy, I'm looking at yours.  Yes, this needs to come from your virtual account and it looks like it didn't.  There's a checkbox at the bottom of the popup where you can say that.  Yes, it took your account negative, which might be perfectly fine, it would then get evened out when the distribution happens.

Suggestion: let's make the distribution (Jim, can you do that with me today?).  Then Tammy, let's walk it through together if you like.  Or Tibi's instructions are also quite good.  So your choice.  Maybe the easiest would be to delete the event you created, and we'll add it again. 

As you all can see, the process logging has undergone more use than the exchange logging.  We are in the middle of a big re-think on the exchange model, which will involve the network being able to set up their own exchange types (like Crowdfunding, Fiscal Sponsorship, etc.) and also get it completely away from standard enterprise stuff like Sales, etc.  As part of that we'll improve the UI, which was pretty quick and dirty.  At least it will be all on one page.

[Tammy Lea Meyer]

Thanks Lynn.

I'm unwell today... stomach flu! So am monitoring the rich activity here but a bit low energy overall. I'm happy to wait a day or so until the disbursements happen in the system to sort things out.

Tam

[Lynn Foster]

Looking further at Tammy's, now I see what has happened.  You did it exactly right!  It did come from your virtual account, I was looking at the wrong thing.

However, it does look like we have a bug not related to what anyone did.  (I put the "contribute from virtual account" feature in a bit too quickly).  We'll fix it and let you know.  And it is still best to wait for the distribution, then we'll have official numbers.

[Lynn Foster]

OK folks, bug is fixed.  And since the distribution is done, people who want to contribute back into Sensorica can do so.  And Tibi (and maybe Jim?) can do payouts.

Tibi's help here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jj1Mj-x4ZSAR1t1HxcKK73zdZDe5QqkeMrCKrpSANOw/edit#heading=h.cxhtfrepn5s7

And I am still fine walking anyone through it.

You can see what is in your virtual account here: http://nrp.sensorica.co/accounting/virtual-accounts/.  (That's a link from the Distribution page.) If you click on your account, you can click on Event History and see what all has gone in and out of your account.

Leftovers: I need to fix some data, will do that today.  And Tammy, your account is now minus one cent, due to differences in the way the spreadsheet and NRP round the distribution results.  Unless you tell me not to, I'll fix that too.  (None of this affects anyone doing what ever they need to in the system.)