My working notes for the wayic + Recast and retask the way from the top, from the criterion of (my) final success, viz. recruitment of developers. : see also @ ~/code/WP3/way/working_notes.brec : see notebook:2022-5-6 : Waycast-based recruiting and simultaneous proof of design call for designs+ : see @ ~/base.brec - Archiving the wayic, at least for now. : see `^^clear the workspace$`i @ ~/base.brec - Trying now a direct approach. : see notepad:2022-12-29 : ‘A hard-hitting approach… Terse steps in short lines (which the imager might (somehow) present in a larger font face), with little or no explanation, except by reference.’ the wayic gets in the way! more than it would help / My attempt to recast this opens my eyes. One needs no wayic to coordinate the development of a software system, even a system as large as the wayic itself. The tedium of the formalizations involved in using it has focused my attention on what is being formalized, viz. what people are actually doing once they enter. - One can contribute to a distant goal through electoral votes, money and/or direct action. - In principle such contributions might collectively be coordinated by a system like the wayic. - Moreover it would bring benefits in terms of visibility — e.g. seeing what goals are out there, what means/plans of reaching them — that would draw the users in. - But there it seems to stop — no longer can I picture people actually using it, certainly not as (primarily) an executive system, a system of direct action. / Maybe those visibility benefits could be realized by some other kind of system, one that grounds itself in reality by means other than direct action etc.. - At present the wayic (as sketched) gives nothing that would help an executive organization but the mere hierarchic form. : e.g. ~/code/WP3/wayic/intercast/external_fit_and_internal_form.brec - Alone that would not suffice. / Nor would Votorola-style electoral polls/primaries suffice in the absence of direct action; nor the tiny trickles of money that flow outside of commerce and tax yields. - Between the drag it would put on developers (not needing it to collaborate) and the lack of an obvious, immediate reward to ordinary users, I’ve lost my confidence in this design. not so, rather consider: - The benefits (below) more than suffice to cover the overhead costs of the system. - Before all else, the system benefits its developers. It shows: • The design of the system itself: its architecture, with purpose/function tied to the structural members • Precisely where development help is needed: open positions/jobs/tasks each tied to a structural member, overlying function, or whatnot - Then it gives to the new developer (who entered by this mechanism) the confidence that: • Other developers are likely to enter by the same mechanism • He himself can employ the same mechanism to get help, e.g. to bring co-workers (team-mates or subordinates) into his own part of the project / Here (even at the lowest levels) is a competitive potential. • End users will eventually be able to enter by (and then employ) the same mechanism to engage in their innumerable non-technical tasks. / The immediate attraction for the end user will be the relation of these tasks (through the way) to the final end (a thing of value, freely chosen), which he (together with others) may thereby contribute to and partake in. - So it is likely to snowball. Seeing this, the developers will commit the time/effort necessary to make it happen. / They will understand, too, that other things might later be attached to the framework by similar mechanisms — e.g. means of contribution other than direct action, such as money and electoral votes — and this will add to their conviction. - With little exaggeration, you could say it’s a pure front-end system (at least to begin with), a system dedicated to the function of entry, and so able to wrap itself around (and supplement or co-opt) other, pre-existing systems (of any size) that underperform in that function. / We’ve seen this done by retailers, of course. I know of a law firm, too, that spent hugely on advertising, then farmed out the resulting surplus of clients to third-party firms, so skimming the profits and growing at their expense. / It needn’t be zero sum, though, it could work to everyone’s benefit. - This socio-architectural view is central to a technological understanding of the wayic, for it relates to and ties together several aspects of the technology that are crucial to its success. • societal fit - Snaps into place and locks there. • theory, in the duty of providing a facility of ends justification - The societal fit (structure and function) is just the institution of that facility. • motivation to build the wayic - The utility (to developers) that makes it snowball from the get go, while still in the hands of developers, - Moreover it is easy for developers to understand, the pedagogical path of least resistance for that all-important audience. - It fits neatly with their habits of thought *as developers*. ! The integration of way models is much too complicated, then, given that the principle function of the waysource and way models is to relate individual means (action, money, etc.) to the final, collective goal. : re `integration of way models` see `^^integrative trees`i @ ~/code/WP3/wayic/intercast/external_fit_and_internal_form.brec not so, the complexity is essential to the relational function - That function *itself* is complicated, especially in open, collectives of potentially huge scope and thereby scale of their way models. - The formal mechanism that tackles that function in the design sketch (tightly interconnected integrative and executive trees) reflects that inherent complexity, but nevertheless seems able to handle the (complex of) use cases rather elegantly. / A frozen way model (closed to grass-roots input/feedback) would shatter under the strains that attend scale, breaking the collective into splinters that reflect the same complexity in a less useful form. ?+ How does the way descend through the cast of the wayic? : re `cast of the wayic` see ./ - Some kind of structure/architecture file must cast the need/purpose of the hierarchic divisions below, which gives them their mandate. + Consider: structural members and functional steps (including special, overriding tasks) to which open positions/jobs may be attached in the form of (open) appointments. ?+ What form/mechanism to recruit (attract/take in) new members to teams (at whatever level), that we may *by that same form/mechanism* recruit the initial developers now? \ ?+ What had I sketched for that in past attempts? \ : see ~/code/WP3/way/wayic/._/purpose_motive_method_etc/working_notes.brec \ ?+ Is this not the heart of ‘waycast-based recruiting and simultaneous proof of design’? \ : re `waycast-based.+design`sp see notebook:2022-5-6 attraction - The readme file. : e.g. README.brec - It refers to the intake form/mechanism. : see `^^intake$`i intake \ ?+ What had I sketched for that in past attempts? \ : see `^^steps, file`i @ ../working_notes.brec ?+ How formalized? | file - Listing open positions, appointment to which would finalize the intake. | appointments (open ones) alone, or embedded in the waysource ?+ Does ‘way formation’ truly describe the function of the wayic? : cf. `ends justification.+as opposed to.+goal orientation`i ?+ Is not ends justification its proper function? - Not only does the theory imply so, but it better fits the premise and will likely be easier to explain that way. : re `theory` see ../ethic/ : re `premise` see ~/code/WP3/way/wayic/._/purpose_motive_method_etc/premise.brec reterming of ‘ends justification’ as opposed to ‘goal orientation’ - It is much clearer than ‘goal orientation’ and better meshes with the ethic. - The wayic system is then one of ends justification and promotion. : see http://reluk.ca/project/wayic/intercast/external_fit_and_internal_form.brec : I was looking here to begin with, and also had changed (subsequently reverted) symbols ‘g’ to ‘e’ in line with an anticipated change of ‘goal forest’ to ‘ends forest’. / `zz-ed` swatches:   $mod_count += ( $line =~ s;\bEndmost\b;Furthermost;g );   $mod_count += ( $line =~ s;\bendmost\b;furthermost;g );   $mod_count += ( $line =~ s;Goal forest;Ends forest;g );   $mod_count += ( $line =~ s;goal forest;ends forest;g );     $mod_count += ( $line =~ s;\bA end;An end;g );   $mod_count += ( $line =~ s;\ba end;an end;g );   $mod_count += ( $line =~ s;\bAn furthermost;A furthermost;g );   $mod_count += ( $line =~ s;\ban furthermost;a furthermost;g ); similar projects / It would be imprudent to forego all effort in this direction. + Search the Web by the following terms. / Task leaves are final terms (yet) to be appended to ancestors and searched in combination. - software - personal "long term" OR "long-term" OR "long term" -career -financial / Here `personal`, `-career` and `-financial` help to avoid results specific to business and career. - planning - goals - collaborative "long term" OR "long-term" OR "long term" - planning + goals + practical reason + goal orientation + final ends - life OR lifetime OR "life-time" + planning + goals + Search Google Scholar by the same terms. + Redact and publish in list form. distantly related • Consilience Project : see https://consilienceproject.org/ - 2021-12-31, largely just a blog, nothing here appears relevant. • Long Now Foundation : see https://longnow.org/ - Only distantly related. - 2021-6-30, nothing here appears relevant. : private