Curt Doolittle

Theme: Institution

  • but trust transaction costs+institutional costs reverse gains. Small-homogeneous

    but trust transaction costs+institutional costs reverse gains. Small-homogeneous wins.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-08-15 17:08:05 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/765233611645779968

    Reply addressees: @JaimelHemphill @pdamra @dmataconis @mmurraypolitics

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/765225596934721536

    IN REPLY TO:

    @JaimelHemphill

    @pdamra @curtdoolittle @dmataconis @mmurraypolitics Nature has proven diversity is strength. The new America: get on or get out.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/765225596934721536

  • WE ARE THE STRANGE PEOPLE. THE REST OF THE WORLD IS NORMAL: CORRUPT. that the pu

    WE ARE THE STRANGE PEOPLE. THE REST OF THE WORLD IS NORMAL: CORRUPT.

    that the purpose of the militia, the sheriff, and the judiciary, is to eliminate corruption from the market economy, and resist as much as possible political corruption from entering the market economy, while preserving the natural corruption that exist in the ‘favors’ economy, of the political production of commons.

    American corruption is fairly isolated in the sense that it’s political and systemic, and usually hidden, and rarely interferes with the private economy.

    This differs from most of the world, and certainly within the post-soviet countries, where citizens directly experience corruption with nearly all officials, and where it’s terribly common to have the government collect protection money, or for the government to construct false legal claims in order to force you into bankruptcy so that your business can be bought for pennies by one of the political allies.

    These are normal everyday occurrences here. I have been in stores when people come in seeking bribes. I have paid bribes to policemen. I have paid bribes to administration officials. I have paid bribes to customs officers – not to get away with anything mind you – but to prevent them from imposing HIGHER costs on me unjustly.

    I have no problem with paying anyone for extraordinary work, like higher prices for shorter lines. Some of us have more money than time, and some more time than money. I have no problem paying someone for extraordinary service (rushing some work). This is not corruption, it’s compensation.

    It’s corruption when it costs money to have someone just do a job, or when you aren’t initiating it in order to obtain extra service.

    Most of the world is corrupt/ it is the west that’s unique.

    We are the weird people.

    The rest of the world is normal: corrupt.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-08-15 15:47:00 UTC

  • It’s not SOME intellectuals, it’s career-ending policy in academia. I couldn’t w

    It’s not SOME intellectuals, it’s career-ending policy in academia. I couldn’t work in the academy. Truth isn’t desirable.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-08-15 13:25:24 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/765177573563330560

    Reply addressees: @clairlemon

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/764684908803428352

    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/764684908803428352

  • Q&A: —“CURT: WHAT’S WRONG WITH CAPITALISM?”— —“What is wrong with capitali

    Q&A: —“CURT: WHAT’S WRONG WITH CAPITALISM?”—

    —“What is wrong with capitalism? Can it be solved by economic theories alone, or is it a leadership problem as well?”—

    Well, let’s take a ‘meaningful’ name: “capitalism”, and restated it operationally, using a ‘true’ name: What problems arise from the voluntary organization of production distribution and trade(capitalism) with individual distribution of property rights providing individual discretion using information provided by the pricing system, compared to the involuntary organization of production, distribution, and trade (socialism) with the discretionary distribution of property rights, in the absence of a pricing system, and compared to a mixed economy, where we use the voluntary organization of production, distribution, and trade, with the individual allocation of property rights, and with individual discretion provided by the pricing system, yet representative decision over the amount and use of the proceeds from the voluntary organization of production? And why has no one really succeded at producing a mixed property economy (other than the fascists), whereby the majority of consumption goods are produced by the voluntary market, and the commons are produced by the involuntary organization of production? In other words, we use armies for building defense, why don’t we use the industrial equivalent of armies to build and maintain infrastructure, and maintain the beauty, and civility of the commons.

    That’s a very long way of describing the problem, but it still obscures the next layer of complexity: discretion (decidability).

    The market provides superior decidability for those things that will benefit from competition. In many cases, competition for ideas(architecture and engineering) is beneficial but competition for labor is not (construction and maintenance).

    The answer is that we cannot choose pure capitalism because too many people are of too little value in many markets, because of immigration, asymmetric class reproduction, or simply overpopulation in relation to the trustworthiness of the people and their institutions.

    Likewise we cannot choose pure socialism, because there are too few incentives for people to engage in value-creating production, and too many incentives for people to engage in corruption.

    When we try a mixed appropriation economy (what we call a mixed economy today), we seem to produce rapidly decreasing birth rates in our productive people, and extraordinary rents in the public sector.

    We considered trying a mixed production economy, but the problem is the statists and rent seekers in the productive sector compete using the government to deprive the private sector.

    So the problem is not capitalism or socialism. The problem is demographic mix, the mixture of voluntary and involuntary organiztaion of production to suit the demographics and institutions available, and the elimination of discretion from the people in what we call government so that even if they exist they cannot (easily) engage in corruption.

    The problem is:

    1) That we lack rule of law rather rule of legislation. Majority rule, representative democracy, is perhaps the worst government everyone ever produced. If we could vote to oust the entire government every 90 days, and rescind all acts of that government upon successful ouster, then that might be helpful. If we could sue government participants if they tried to construct or did construct immoral contracts, then that would be an a solutoin. And if we were still required to pay a progressive income tax, but we chould choose how it was allocated, right down to the paperclip, I think that would solve the problem.

    2) But then we get to the answer: That we lack a market for the production of commons (like we had under english houses of parliament). We rely on assent (majority rule) creating opportunity for corruption, instead of relying on dissent (violation of natural, judge discovered, common law) to prevent immoral and illegal contracts for the production of commons. We could allocate funds evenly and let areas negotiate exchanges. And that would produce a moral and naturally legal market for the production of commons.

    3) We rely on fiat money (which is an advantage) but we distribute liquidity and dividends through the financial system rather than directly to consumers. In other words, we cause consumers and businesses to fight for credit, rather than businesses and finance to fight for consumer spending.

    So as humans we tend to like to break ideas down into too simple a set of comparisons, becuase really, it’s hard to work with anything other than ideal types. Humans… well, we just aren’t that smart. (Try algebraic geometry, which in principle should’nt be too complicated, but our minds are just not often made for it.)

    Instead we must often thing in supply demand curves, becuase whether the thing we are discussing is persona, social, international, or physical concept, we deal with equilibrial forces.

    In this case we have a series of problems we must deal with:

    1) demographic distributions: the differnce between races is largely one of sexual maturity and asymmetric sexual dimorphism producing differences in abilities. This is magnified by geography that cuases various selection pressures. As such poor places just were worse at killing off the lower classes and suppressing their reproduction, and the wealthier places better at upward redistribution of resources and constant culling of the underclasses through sanction (killing), war, starvation, and the difficulty of surviving in cold climates.

    2) Information and incentives: the pricing system provides opportunity to FORM both information and incentives.

    3) Discretion versus rule of law: Discretion and corruption versus rule of law and non-corruption.

    4) The distribution of the organizaiton of production from authoritarian (originating in the fertile crescent and other flood plains) raider ethics (originating in steppe and desert), and libertarian (originating in the forest and sea peoples), and equalitarian, (preserved among hunter-gatherers).

    The solution is to solve all these problems with (a) rule of law (non discretion) (b) market production of commons limited by legal dissent. (c) extension of involuntary production for the construction and maintenance of commons, and reduction of the voluntary organization of production to those capable of surviving within it. (d) the restoration of the family as the central object of policy (e) the restoration of the process of intergenrational lending to preserve knowldge and calculability. (f) the direct and equal distribution of liquidity under fiat money (shares in the commons) to consumers in the case of the necessity to reorder the sustainable patterns of specialization and trade (the market) when it incurrs shocks or exhaustions (of opportunities).

    I could go on but I think you get the general idea. We got it wrong when we tried to steal the commons from the aristocracy by imposing majoritarianism, rather than constructing additional houses and continuing the tradition of using government as a market for the production of commons by negotiation between the classes.

    The middle class was nowhere near as good at governing as the aristocracy.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine

    Source date (UTC): 2016-08-14 16:17:00 UTC

  • Regardless of revenue, you are a small business until you must rely on policies

    Regardless of revenue, you are a small business until you must rely on policies and procedures.

    You are a family until you need norms.

    Your are a tribe until you need law.

    You are a collection of tribes until you combine resources to produce physical commons.

    You are a village until you have a market with standard weights and measures.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-08-14 09:15:00 UTC

  • “the default mode of the modern age is the disruption of the family. No need for

    –“the default mode of the modern age is the disruption of the family. No need for the Others to play the devil.”— Adam Voight

    Source date (UTC): 2016-08-12 09:48:00 UTC

  • MONOPOLY STATE EDUCATION? Q&A: —“What are your thoughts on universal public ed

    MONOPOLY STATE EDUCATION?

    Q&A: —“What are your thoughts on universal public education being provided by the state.”—

    GREAT QUESTION

    WHEREAS

    (1) Education provides both offensive and defensive benefits.

    So (a) Offensively, it increases the possibility of productivity (a commons).

    And (b) Defensively it reduces crime(loss), insurance(restitution) and welfare (prevention) costs. (Humans are really expensive things.)

    While we probably teach largely the wrong things today, and that we teach them poorly, (not enough repetition of basic operations), that does not mean that we cannot teach the right things.

    After Defense (external), and Law and order(internal), education is probably the most important offensive and defensive capability a group can add to the commons.

    So I am pretty sure education needs to be mandatory in order to avoid externalizing costs of failing to educate (prevention) on fellow shareholders (citizens), due to loss, restitution. ( Same with driving a vehicle without insurance. Or driving aggressively. You’re exporting risk onto others. ) Failing to educate is just like failing to respect property. It’s just more indirect.

    Now, if you have the right of exit, and your offspring have the right of exit, and you leave the market (territory), that’s not the case. But then you lose the benefits of being a member of the market (territory). So it’s your choice. It’s pretty hard to find a market that will allow entry of an uneducated person. It’s just going to force costs on shareholders (citizens)

    (2) So if education is both a necessary good, and a moral obligation, then the question is only (a)whether universal provision by the state is a necessary or preferable, and (b) whether the monopoly provision of it by the state is necessary or preferable.

    Well first we have to answer the externality question.

    Does universal provision by the state solve the problem of the costs of loss, restitution, and prevention? Well yes. It does.

    Does the scale of that provisioning convey any price benefits? Actually no. Because the bureaucracy consumes a disproportionate amount of the funds, without any measurable positive impact, and arguably negative.

    Does universal education using the same curriculum have positive or negative consequences. Well the answer is that any education must provide some minimum: reading, writing, basic math, basic personal accounting, basic principles of contract, basic principles of the economy. Basic principles of natural law, basic principles of physical laws. Note that I’ve included no mythology in that list. No justificationism.

    Does universal education need mythology? Well I think that teaching anything antithetical to natural and physical law, antithetical to contract, accounting, mathematics, and reading (the common tongue), is something that exports costs onto others through the propagation of falsehoods.

    Can I teach my own children mythology at home, or in religious school? Of course you can. If it is taught as spiritual, as faith, as psychology, but not in conflict with physical, natural, contactual, mathematical, literacy, or rhetorical, grammatical, and logical truth.

    There are no ancient texts that cannot be translated into ratio-scientific language as necessary and possible traditions of the time. There are no normative family and cultural traditions that cannot likewise be explained. There is no harm in prayer, ritual, and faith, even if there is harm in conflating spiritual(experiential) and truthful(testimonial). It’s very hard to argue with the sermon on the mount. And it’s not hard to state that them miracles are fairy tales meant to educated us on how we should aspire to behave toward one another.

    CLOSING

    So like anything, when we want to produce a private good (education) for common goods (costs of loss, restitution, and prevention), then the market will succeed at providing some goods (private education, church education, public education) just as it will succeed at providing other goods (private health care, church health care, state health care), and many other goods (private investor banking, commercial banking, credit unions, and state treasury support).

    So the problem we have had in the past, is not the failure to understand this problem, but the failure to require truth, while preserving faith. Because man does not live by truth alone unless he lives in a large primitive tribe where he is saturated by information supplied by peers and there is no meaningful information available to him that is not shared by those peers. Even in those circumstances we require faith in order to ease the various sufferings, and to cause the community to unite in celebration of the service of the common good.

    Ergo, we must warranty all speech, products and services against error, bias, wishful, thinking, suggestion, pseudoscience, and deceit.

    And we must warranty the minimum (not ultimate) services that an individual must possess in order not to be a burden on others such that he invokes moral hazard, and by invoking moral hazard, creates the incentive in the commons to abandon perfect-care of the commons. This is a profoundly important issue: preservation of the incentive to preserve and expand the commons.

    And as long as one warranties minimum provision, no falsehood, and treats myths as necessary goods as long as they do not violate the natural and physical and contractual and logical law, then there is no reason we cannot provide public (insured education), private education(market provided education), and community education (church, etc),

    My suggestion, as always with regard to the professions, is (a) that I don’t believe anyone that is not a grandmother or grandfather should teach anything to anyone. Otherwise we have a person without life experience conveying the necessities of surviving life’s experiences. (b) that it’s the teachers who are paid, not organizations, and that the teachers contribute some part of their fees to the maintenance of the organization. And that organizations that desire capital investment can lend against future earnings. And that we can only lend against future earnings if the citizenry is to insure the loan. These are the terms by which teachers can teach, schools can form. Not in the interests of the school owners, but in the interest of the teachers and the students.

    I think all education should be paid for as deductions from future earnings (payroll fees). And current costs covered from the treasury. Why? Because it’s an investment that produces guaranteed returns, if we keep honest statistics on the performance of different degree programs and their classes. (Early childhood ed is a very bad investment, right behind Sociology). Then universities and schools will not charge money for the modern equivalent of “indulgences” which they give people paper in exchange for participating in nonsense for years, all at the public expense.

    In university, paying teachers directly and separating teaching and researching staff, and paying them accordingly. (the way oxford and Cambridge were started)

    We can let the market regulate education by using the courts to punish people who teach untruths contrary to natural, physical, contractual, and logical laws. If we did this in just one generation we would change the world for the better nearly as much as we changed the world with greek reason, British science, and enlightenment literacy. Truth is as important an innovation as were literacy, reason, and science. It’s just unfortunate that it took us this long to discover what it means.

    So that’s my position:

    Private(wealthy), civic(middle), and public(lower) institutions for the purpose of education, paid for out of future earnings, teaching the minimums, requiring warranty, and separating spirituality and myth from action and truth.

    What will rapidly occur is that government schools will rapidly improve else the stigma close them, and as usual the wealthy will innovate and the rest benefit.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine

    Source date (UTC): 2016-08-12 05:41:00 UTC

  • OVERSING – SERIOUS QUESTION – GO TO MARKET? (thinking in public) (long) (busines

    OVERSING – SERIOUS QUESTION – GO TO MARKET?

    (thinking in public) (long) (business questions) (oversing details)

    QUESTION: Will the WordPress/Craigslist Strategy Work for our product Oversing?

    WHEREAS (challenges and opportunities)

    – Oversing is a huge and fairly complex product, it’s an ERP.

    – It is bigger than Jira by an order of magnitude, because it addresses the needs of the entire business not just development and help desk.

    – It is easier to use than Jira and MS-CRM and Sharepoint.

    – it is relatively easy for us (me) to customize oversing for and organization’s use.

    – It is possible for someone with experience with CRM’s or ERP’s to configure oversing for use in an organization.

    – It will take someone with experience with Jira or a less advanced product to configure it for departmental use.

    – It will take users some time, and administrators more time to learn all of it.

    BUT (handling challenges)

    – We can turn features on and off incrementally as users need them by simply assigning features to roles, and flipping a switch on a user’s profile granting the user access to that role’s features.

    – Jira is notoriously unintuitive and complicated, and for that matter, so are Salesforce and MS CRM. Complexity and learning curve are not a challenge for market leaders. However,

    WHEREAS (current conditions)

    – the product is in beta state, and we have spent the summer with clients, and only half our efforts or less focused on the bug and usability issues.

    – The bugs are standard fare. But the little usability issues in this complex a system can frustrate users. And we did not predict many of them – simply because it’s so large.

    – There are three areas that concern me: (i) we need a lot of help and tutorial work (ii) we have improved the performance of the ui, but we can still improve it, and possibly need to. But my decision was this: given the rate of advancement I should design the app for a decade or more, not for current limitations. (iii) the gantt view doesn’t work well enough because honestly it is just too big and heavy. It will handle more records than any competitors products. But I feel it is not yet usable in mutli-project businesses that I want to address in agencies and consultancies. So I want to write something custom and light. (iiii) We can migrate workflows just fine, but we haven’t written code to migrate between organizational structures.(v)

    – It will take us three years of additional versions to complete the vision we have for the program. This involves (i) the future of email messaging, (2) the addition of financial accounting to our existing management accounting, (3) custom properties, (4) changing our database searches to rely on Elastic Search technology. (i viewed it as something I could push until later since it’s not important until we have custom properties.).

    THE VISION (Goal)

    – The vision is that we provide both web and desktop equivalents, and provide an alternative to the Microsoft platform stack (although not the document creation suite).

    – But more importantly, that Oversing captures much more detail about you and your organization’s behaviors than do google and Facebook combined. But instead of selling this information to marketers *against your interest, and against your will* we will provide this information about you and your organization back to you – and provided it in the context of similar organizations in the marketplace.

    This is our long-term objective: to provide continuous career-enhancing feedback to users, managers, and executives that reflects the needs and wants of individual personalities (characters and goals), while producing reputations for people in the workplace that are independent of political and personal bias.

    We want to disrupt the business sphere as much as Facebook has disrupted the social sphere – but for entirely different reasons.

    THEREFORE (hypothesis)

    Given that we need to incrementally expand the product over the next two or three years, How do we enter the market now?

    Originally we had thought that we would take the enterprise sales route, and grow slowly. But this creates a fairly high barrier to adoption since it’s a huge commitment on the part of a customer.

    On the other hand, if you have ever run a services organization in tech, marketing, or advertising of more than 200 people (I have) you really stop caring about the cost of learning, because without that information it’s really hard to maintain operational profitability.

    The reason we were (wildly) successful at our business is (a) we had Microsoft as a cash-cow, (b) we could overpay for talent to serve them, giving us room to experiment (c) even if we were creatively weak, we were operationally excellent in ways that only the big six firms can match. And the reason we were operationally excellent is we used the internal precursor to Oversing to run the entire business under the agile model using weekly sprints for project management and resourcing.

    Now you know, the truth is, most management doesn’t manage the organization, but instead, tries to (a)contribute in say, sales; or (b) play with financial information – meaning they have lousy systems, because your systems should tell you everything every moment without investigation, or (c) do anything they can to shirk management by pushing it off on someone else. When the answer is working people as a process of continuous improvement in them, the work, and the relationship with the customer,and of course, reaching profit goals without sacrificing people, work, or relationship with the customer.

    So the challenge to this model is that Oversing is designed to allow you to manage an EXCELLENT business, not a lazy one. I built it to duplicate our agile management of the entire business.

    Then we thought we should create a community edition without financial and administrative features – purely project and program-centric, and then allow users to purchase (license) their own database instances (like Asana etc), all of which run off of the same web server instance, but different database instances. Yet all reputation and statistics are promoted to the main server database, giving you a superior reputation to that of say, LinkedIn. This is how Oversing works today.

    But again, we feel we need a lower barrier to entry.

    This summer we started working with one of the online talent marketplaces, (freelancer and contractor type work). These sites take a commission on arranging work between buyers and sellers of talent in all sorts of fields – particularly technology. Becuase the workforce has gone global. Particularly for even moderate English speakers.

    We’d originally designed oversing for in-house use, then for public use, but we hadn’t addressed the issue of freelancers bidding on work. But adding the freelancer marketplace to Oversing was just a matter of a few additions: (i) creating a few new panels (talent market, work market), and modifying the Skills panel so that it updated both of those market panels if they’re open. (ii) creating new entity types to add to the workflow engine for bids/bid-requests, bid-invoices, and bid-invoice-payments (there are 30+ types of tasks you can add to a project, and this adds three more. you can think of a project as a combination of a task list, project plan, and project accounting journal). Then hooking into the payment processing system. (iii) updating our various reporting views (there are really just a few of them) to include the new entity types. Sure we can do more, but that’s the minimum necessary. So we set about doing that.

    This seemed to us that it might be the right level of barrier to entry – because it’s free. Yep. Free. Just as WordPress sites are free unless you want customization, and just as Craigslist is free unless you want to post a job ad.

    So we can run the site overhead on (low) fees; charge for custom instances for those who want them; charge for setup and integration services if customers want them.

    Fees in the business work about like this:

    (i) – The “dating service’ between talent and project manager: 20%,10%,5% depending upon the size of the customer relationship. Basically after 10k, you’re just making 2.5%.

    (ii) – Outsourced project management of freelancer projects for customers: 20%.

    (iii) – Outsourced work at agencies and consultancies: 50%.

    (iv) SAAS Licensing Fees for instances: $5-25$-$50-$300 per user per year depending upon which product we’re talking about. In my view we want to be at the bottom end of that. Even though we will offer a combined stack that is far beyond what established companies provide. (100 people 6k-60K per year). (It’s cheap really if enterprise software costs you one admin headcount per year there is no way it’s not a wash.)

    BUT IS IT ENOUGH?

    Entry points at different levels of the application allow users to get exposure to the features they need without feeling that they need to master the entire thing from the beginning.

    We need entry points for end-users, so that they create profiles, and reputations, and bid on and post work. In house or out of house.

    We need entry points for the various kinds of leads, project managers and department managers

    We need entry points for the executive team that decides upon which package to implement.

    If you told me as an exec of a large services business that I could modernize without much risk, and really cut my licensing, and software costs, and probably cut my headcount costs, I think I would at least give it a shot assuming the analysts were paying attention to it.

    Now, if you told me that, as an exec, I could use Oversing for free, and that the only price I’d pay was a commission on freelancer deals, then I would say that was pretty cool. Most of the time it’s 10K+ for the software, then 10-100k for the configuration and training.

    If you told me as a department manager that I could get an enterprise platform for free, I think I would find that pretty interesting – certainly, I would take a look at it.

    If you told me I could use another project management site, I don’t know why I would pay the high learning costs without having a client request I use it.

    If you told me that I could sign up for another freelancer site, I doubt that I would bother unless someone invited me to in order to get work.

    If I saw advertisements suggesting I try oversing versus Jira I think that would be a pretty interesting choice. But you know, most of the expansion in dev tools has been at the low end, and for them, simple things like Basecamp are fine.

    So the customer is really not the casual user but the professional that is accountable for performance: project, program, department, operations, and execs.

    I mean the difference between oversing and Jira is the difference between internal support and consulting, agency, and freelance businesses.

    SO, REPEATING THE QUESTION

    If we can make enough money (we can) on transactions, why not make it free, and only charge for private instances? Can we make the same attack on the mainstream platforms over time the way FB, WordPress, Craigslist, and to some degree, Jira has?

    OUR BUSINESS PROBLEM:

    AWARENESS VIA ENTRY CLIENTS ->

    …..TIME FOR EXPANDING FEATURES ->

    ………COMPLETE MAINSTREAM CORP STACK COMPETITOR

    OVERVIEW OF OVERSING FEATURES

    ====================

    OVERSING SYSTEM SERVICES

    —-Workflow System

    ——–Users

    ——–Contacts

    ——–Companies (customers)

    ——–Invoices

    ——–Programs

    ————Overhead, Cost Center,

    ————Revenue,

    ————Vacation/holiday,

    ————Personal

    ——–Program Task Types

    ————Strategy (Management initiatives),

    ————Sales,

    ————Recruiting,

    ————Career(hr/mentoring),

    ————Delivery (any kind of other project)

    ——–Operational Periods (‘Revenue Sprints’)

    ————–Timecards

    ——————-Work Logs (Timeslips)

    ————–Expenses

    ————–Adjustments

    ————–Transfers

    ————–Commissions

    ————–Proposals(bids)

    ————–Proposal-Invoices

    ————–Proposal-Payments

    —-Reputation Systems

    ——–Skill and Reputation System

    ——–Awards (Gamification) System

    ——–NPS Survey System

    —-Accounting Systems

    ——–Currency System (real time, fully preserved)

    ——–General (Project) Ledger

    ——–Project Accounting System (no accrual services)

    ——–Costs allocation system

    ……………….(to individuals giving real p&l per person)

    —-Security Systems

    ——–User Authentication System (access to app)

    ——–Access Roles System (access to features)

    ——–Workflow Automated Permissions

    ——–Permissions System (access to content)

    —-Support Systems

    ——–Internationalization (translation) system

    ——–Scheduling (cron) System

    ——–Queue Manager (‘Ratchet’)

    ——–Workspace State System (‘Redis’)

    ——–Websocket Publishing System

    USER SERVICES

    My Organization

    —-My Org Structure

    ——– My Workflows

    ——– My Chart of Accounts

    ——– My Rate Sheets

    —-My Users

    ———My Workspaces

    ———My Favorites

    ———My Programs / Projects /Tasks

    ———My Skills and Reputations

    ———My Files

    ———My Rates

    —-My Customers (Organizations)

    ——–My Contacts

    ——–My Contracts

    ——–My Invoices

    ——–My Programs

    ————-My Program Accounts

    ————-My Projects / Tasks / Xactions / Files

    ——————Deliverables / Tasks / Xactions / Files

    ——————Documents

    ———————- Sections / Articles / Scrivenings

    ———————- Citations, Definitions, References

    1) FINISH TALENT MARKETPLACE WORK

    2) OPERATIONAL TEMPO WORKSPACE

    (Not yet)

    allows you to manage the different time periods more easily

    3) REPLACE HEAVY GANTT WITH LIGHT TIMELINE

    4) WORDPRESS INTEGRATION

    (not yet) Easy but not done.

    5) FULL FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING

    (not yet)

    6) Elastic Search

    7) Point to point secure messaging and mail.

    If you made it through this, thank you. I always appreciate feedback and the opportunity to air my ideas in public.

    I’m aware that most anyone who reads this probably is not working in an executive capacity. And oversing is too much for you as an individual or small business member.

    Affections all

    Curt Doolittle

    (h/t: and many thanks to my good friend Kevin Dillon for the WordPress Strategy)

    Source date (UTC): 2016-08-12 04:28:00 UTC

  • NEW FEATURES IN OVERSING. Don’t remember if I’ve talked about it, but we’ve adde

    NEW FEATURES IN OVERSING.

    Don’t remember if I’ve talked about it, but we’ve added freelancer market features to Oversing. This means that freelancers can join, you can put tasks, jobs, projects, into the marketplace and ask for bids or proposals on them. People can submit proposals, including their own task list, story collection or project plan. And then book time, expenses, and issue invoices, and make payments within the interface, just by creating each kind of task.

    It’s pretty awsome.

    It’s more awesome if we can ship it. lol

    Source date (UTC): 2016-08-11 12:35:00 UTC

  • Eli Harman (@MartianHoplite): Noblesse oblige is simple common sense. People wil

    https://t.co/bVfQ82vpTzRetweeted Eli Harman (@MartianHoplite):

    Noblesse oblige is simple common sense. People will support an order that works for them, but not one that doesn’t.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-08-11 03:16:00 UTC