Thank you for that swift response!
Any thoughts on what this implies (with reference to the licences) for the team leaving the project?
2 Likes
MIT license is generally considered pretty permissive, allowing for commercial and non-commercial use (as far as I understand; not super knowledgable about licensing). While I canāt speak for the āteamā, such licensing does place less restrictions on other projects using SourceCred. Which could lead to more projects using/integrating it. Which will change the āincentive landscapeā surrounding the project.
4 Likes
Super interested to hear how this goes. Why was SourceCred chosen over Tally, Coordinape, or other tools out of curiosity?
6 Likes
Wasnāt there for the deliberations, but feel Iād be remiss not dropping this relevant research Maker did when evaluating SourceCred vs Coordinape for a similar implementation (rewarding contributors for governance work on their Discourse).
Big fan of Coordinape, but in this case (rewarding forum contributions), I can imagine it having a couple issues:
- Scaling: Coordinape circles generally work best with small groups. SCRF is concerned with groups that might be larger (e.g. all researchers in a field, or interested in a particular topic)?
- Collusion: Coordinapeās approach is highly subjective. An interesting potential of SourceCred is that it has a claim to credible neutrality by combining subjective and objective inputs using a gaming-resistant algorithm (PageRank).
Note: I work on SourceCred so may be biased 
8 Likes
I believe some of the backchannel discussion to put SourceCred forward first was the ease of implementation and also how straight forward it would be to scale, as was mentioned by @s_ben
Long term, there is interest to make use of a variety of tools like Coordinape. Do you have a specific tool you would want to see implemented? I think that could lead to some interesting collaborations.
6 Likes
So interesting. I wonder what could be addressed through organisational structure (e.g. subsidiarity), that would omit the need for algorithmic tools for contribution tracking
5 Likes
Thanks for this clarification and comparison on this ā¦as this would hellp to improveour rewards system within Organizationsā¦am quite familiar with both toolsā¦, I made use of sourcecred in the past and currently using coordinape. They are both good for rewarding contributors in DAOās but the problem i have with sourcecred is that its not easy to implement since it requires DEV knowledge but a good part of sourcecred I know is that gamification can be controlled ā¦On the other hand coordinape is quite easy to implement even without prior DEV knowledge but A way in which I see gaming in coordinape is that people arenāt getting rewards based on workdone but its now based on your popularity within an Organizationā¦
5 Likes
The technical barrier to operating SourceCred is an important factor. Thatās one reason I recommended SCRF stick to just the Discourse plugin for now. Discourse is the easiest to set up, as it just pulls data from the public APIs (no API key or permissions to manage), and is relatively straightforward to configure. A non-dev can use it if comfortable with the command line and GitHub. The other reasons are: 1) Discourse is relatively more gaming-resistant than Discord, and 2) the amount of data fetched is not so large, which means that updating the data is less error-prone.
Writing a post right now that addresses some of the technical and governance challenges of SCRFās SourceCred instance.
6 Likes
Big fan of coordinape too.
Love what Bankless is doing with the tool.
But your comparison and what Iāve read about Sourcecredās algorithm makes me biased too. 
3 Likes
Very important points raised here @Hermes_Corp
The potential cons of using SC is evident: gaming, less intentions behind interactions and engagement on SCRF, etc.
What Iām curious about is the DAO youāre implementing SC onā¦
I particularly want to know when you first started using SC in the DAO, the impact over time on contributors/members and how interactions and engagement has changed overtime.
1 Like