Quote from: oventu on Today at 12:21:04 PM

"develop" will allow participants to receive currency based on their work. The classification of "develop" actually leverages the people who know how to code, develop an app, or come up with some designs. Assume that I am a farmer and have no idea on how to use a computer, how can I be a part of that community? Even if someone helps me to do that, I have no idea about coding. So, initially this scheme would be making the early adopters rich people of the community, but wouldn't be a totally "fair" way of distribution. There has to be some other way, and additional measurements so that anyone, including a 15 years old high school kid who wants to make some money on the side, can join the community and get paid by their work.

First of all “develop” doesn’t refer to programmers only. Indeed we are all developer and some of us are software developer. So, participation can be materialized by software developing, test, design, documentation, manuals, translate, tutorials and educational stuff, Etc cetera.
This “Etc cetera” can be stretched to even “feeding an elephant in Africa”, if the community accept it.
Only if members of society are mature enough to understand the fact that the prosperity of a poor peasant in a poor country impacts the entire our beautiful world.
Obviously we start from software developer as primarily population, since our first mission is developing software and improve it. And the early adapters have chance to earn more shares and more coins. Every systems need this kind of incentives. If you today start to work you will get paid today, if you start tomorrow, you already lost today, but will get paid from tomorrow. Today you participate one hour and earn X shares, tomorrow you participate one hour and earn half of X.
It is not that bad if rein it properly. And the last but not least, do not forget the mission of this primitive community in first place is release a free and open source software. After shipping this software, every one (even a farmer) can establish a new community and coin, so being first community is not a privilege, if the community do not treat great. I refer you to the other post https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5303276.0
Redefining “exchange rates” to “excellence indice” in “democracy term”
“The new paradigm” is a complex combination of game theories and proper mechanisms and tools. It takes time to form the big picture in whole.

Quote from: oventu on Today at 12:21:04 PM

Another issue is voting, the reason why we vote is not that we are interested in democracy but simply because larger community means more things to be done and more things to be agreed on. In my country there are, perhaps, more than 1000 different government institutes. All of them are interested in different things such as the forests, or infrastructure of cities, or management of air traffic. Cumulatively, I believe there are more than thousands of proposals made in those institutes and as a person I can't spend all day in front of computer, reviewing those proposals. And again, there is the problem of "ignorant". Lets say there is a river and there has to be a bridge to be built, assume that the local people there don't like that bridge because if there is a bridge, visitors won't stop by the village and the villagers will not be able to generate income. Now the government entity that is responsible from that river knows that if bridge is built, the citizens of the country will be saving from fuel, less carbon emission and overall economic profit for every individual. With current system, the bridge would be built, but in your proposal, what if the villagers lobby together, make up some fake stories and make people vote against the bridge? Or another example is anti-vaxxers. I think you get the idea.

We will face different kind of problem in different stage of our life, or more precise in different stage of our community’ life, In terms of population, horizon, and externalities. We have to cope with. It is a life that we have to live it.
What I propose is a direct democracy model. This model will work quite well, if we are a few hundred members. As you said truly “larger community means more things to be done and more things to be agreed on” in larger communities we can manage decisions by some kind of customized smart contracts. As an over simplified example you can delegate your vote in economic issues to some experts that votes in your post. And in political issues vote directly and personally, and about cultural decisions delegate your vote to another group or NGOs of experts, etc..
Using AI and blockchain transparency and history, “you” can observe your “representatives” and not they watch you. If you do not like the representative acts, simply you can revoke your delegation every time. It is just an smart contract and needs a signature.
I have other solutions as well, but I believe “The new paradigm” ethos is not just “my” solutions and “my” prescriptions, instead it is about community (or society) decisions.
We will not face this kind of problems in near future, so we can concentrate on more realistic problems and solve them.
“Conflict of interest” can be happened even between two person, so our “problem solving skills” in our primitive community act a critical role in our community future. Thanks Blockchain technology, there is no place for hypocrisy or hiding problems or misleading.

Quote from: oventu on Today at 12:21:04 PM

Also another thing about proposals, what is stopping me from proposing 100000 ideas a day? All of them are same or slightly modified, so no one has time to review all those and they get accepted. What if one of them is granting me unlimited power to mint unlimited amount of community currency? Initially, as you said on the article, the community can kick me and fork away. But what if that community already has 10 million members? At the end all can vote against me, for away, kick me from the community and so on, but my malicious actions would damage the community and badly affect its reputation,...

Now we need to go a little in technical details.
Offering a proposal and run a polling has cost and proposer has to pay this cost regardless of the result of polling. It is a notable cost (equal to 3 month income of proposal, if be accepted) and is the best barrier against spamming.
Additionally the treasury minting coins are “fixed” that means if current members accept a new member, a part of their actual income will be cut in favor of new member. This is another mechanism to eager members to investigate on new proposals and not just accept everything.
Forking a new coin and boycotting fraudulent member is mater of some hour regardless of how many member community has. Even one percent of community can initialize a polling and run it. They just simply config some numbers such as threshold(e.g. 51 % or 99% or what ever number they like), and some set actions that must be triggered after polling time frame. e.g. if polling agree members hit the threshold, then create a new coin and bring entire history and coins of agreed people to new blockchain and burn their coin in old blockchain. As simple as possible. Then we will have two chain, two community and two different coin. We can have two million community. All are ok. But IMHO there will be few giant communities that they have almost same rules and governing model with slightly difference in money systems.

Quote from: oventu on Today at 12:21:04 PM

why now we have some "dictators" in some countries and why their reputations are bad. If the bad action has a huge effect on the community, its reputation is damaged badly too.

I think we all agree on the fact that “nothing happened overnight!”. Dictators appear overnight, but for years ahead they have secretly and out of sight provided the grounds for their emergence. This can not be happened in such a transparent blockchain systems. We are establishing the communities up from the ground, so fraudulent or corrupted members will be disgraced even before reaching one percent shares of system. One may cheat one, but one can not cheat all.

Quote from: oventu on Today at 12:21:04 PM

I didn't want to comment on the 51% because I believe it is not an issue. The problem could be solved easily if the members of the community really wanted. Since there is polling every day, in case of a 51%, community can easily fork away or update the state of the network.

So, lets practice our future community interactions right now, here. You said “if the members of the community really wanted”, but we need a solution that works even “if the members of the community DO NOT want”, so what is your solution? Here I explained a complementary mechanism and I think you are already agree, since your solution is almost same (in case of a 51%, community can easily fork away or update the state of the network). Maybe you read it again and explain it in your language as well

It will be a good practice for our newborn community.
Redefining “exchange rates” to “excellence indice” in “democracy term”
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5303276.0

Quote from: oventu on Today at 12:21:04 PM

Just, the issue of polling has to be solved first.

I think I already addressed it. if not, please write me in a more detailed scenario the polling issue(s).