|
1
|
- Tom Munnecke
- tom@givingspace.org
- Jan Hauser
- Human Generosity Project
- Banff, Canada
- August 27, 2001
|
|
2
|
- To provide a self-organizing global infrastructure which allows the
creation, discovery, commitment, and fulfillment of meaningful giving
opportunities within a trusted environment.
|
|
3
|
- “What was often difficult for people to understand about the web was
that there was nothing else beyond URLs, HTTP, and HTML. There was no central computer
“controlling” the web, no single network on which these protocols
worked, not even an organization anywhere that “ran” the Web. The web was not a physical “thing”
that existed in a certain “place.”
It was a “space” in which information could exist.”*
- *Berners-Lee, Tim, Weaving the Web, The Original Design and Ultimate
Destiny of the World Wide Web, Harper San Francisco, 1999, p. 36 and 209
|
|
4
|
|
|
5
|
- Assign web site numbers by category: (100-199 Physics, 200-299
Chemistry, etc.)
- Assemble panels of experts to organize the web
- Create a master web administrator to control the web
- Define “pigeonholes” to categorize the right way to structure
information
- Try to solve all problems with the initial conditions
- Control the evolution of the web
- Succumb to proprietary forces and closed systems
|
|
6
|
- What are the simplest initial conditions?
- What drives its evolution?
- What are the constraints?
- These answers define GivingSpace
|
|
7
|
|
|
8
|
- Based on meaningful giving opportunities
- Self-organizing trust mechanism
- Open system
- Scalable to global proportions
- Driven by transformational energy
- Generative space-the more people use it, the bigger it becomes.
- Starts with simple initial conditions
- Supports Trustraising
|
|
9
|
- Trust
- Lots of interaction
- Limits of trust will limit growth
- Encourage “trustraising”
- Feedback
- Lots of it
- Expected part of interaction
- Appropriate transparency
- Allows self organization, “Order for free”
|
|
10
|
- Forum to discuss and refine the concept
- Forum at www.givingspace.org
- Defining Trust Mechanism
- Jan Hauser jan@janhauser.org
- Defining a Philanthropic Markup Language
- Mik Litz michael.litz@oneworld.net
- Forming the Organization
- Tom Munnecke Tom@munnecke.com
|
|
11
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
13
|
- There is a finite pool of donor resources
- Fundraising is key determinant of success
- Funds and resources flow one way from “rich” to “poor”
- Organizations take a slice of the donation as payment to support
operations
|
|
14
|
|
|
15
|
|
|
16
|
|
|
17
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
19
|
- Smaller organizations serving poorer recipients get 25% the donation
efficiency of larger organization serving richer recipients
- “Survival of the fittest” favors larger organizations serving richer
recipients
- Is this what charity is all about?
|
|
20
|
|
|
21
|
|
|
22
|
|
|
23
|
- More transformational feedback
- Less risk
- More scalable
- – everyone in the world could give a smile tomorrow at zero cost
- Allows trust amplification to higher levels of giving
- Less corruptible
- Mailing shoes in two different boxes to Kenya will make it through
the postal service. One box
will be lost in transit.
- More accessible to poorer people and smaller organizations
|