'One sided trade flow'. I think too much talk and incentive structure is about earning/getting dvc. That results in a focus on how/why/where to sell. This undermines the entire point of devcoin, which is to fund open source work, and therefore needs as much if not more focus on support, buying and adding value.

I see dvc as by definition a mutual concept if it's going to take off. Some others see it as a client-employee relationship only; submit work - expect to get paid. That opinion is fine, but because I don't think that's sustainable until there's a much bigger base of support I'm not particularly interested in making transience and/or bounty hunting and/or word dumps easier. If others disagree that's up to them but, for example, if writers aren't buying dvc to support writing then who is and why do we pay for it.

You shouldn't give up on ideas at the first knock back. Whether I or anyone else disagrees doesn't necessarily imply a bad idea. If you've spent time thinking it through and it makes sense, then it may be an issue of explanation. Put it in simpler terms - explain like you're explaining to homer simpson, then people can give feedback on basics.

There's a dvc channel here I saw on first page of the thread: http://webchat.freenode.net/?channels=devcoin although I've never used it.

eeh: I'm not having any issues.

dexter: There's nothing stopping you giving to charity yourself - dvc or otherwise. Would you still be in favour of that idea if the dvc price didn't rise?