- Jan 2024
for - spiritual collectives - non-dogmatic spirituality
summary adjacency between - spiritual collectives - Deep Humanity - Adjacency statement - There is a growing movement of people disenchanted with the contradictions, trauma or dogma of many mainstream religions. - Evangelical pastors and followers are converting to a more open and inclusive spiritual practice. - This growing movement has close resemblance to Deep Humanity in its openess to all religions and spiritual practices as long as they do not bring harm, and the lack of dogmatism. - There could be a good opportunity for synergies since spiritual collectives take an open source / commons approach to spiritual practice wherein we collaborate to surface the best principles to live by. - From a commons / open source perspective, we give this the name - open source religion - open source spirituality
bound by values rather than beliefs.
for - key insight - spiritual collectives - bound by values instead of beliefs
- synergies - Deep Humanity - spiritual collectives
- open source religion
- key insight - spiritual collectives
- adjacency - Deep Humanity - spiritual collectives
- open source spirituality
- spiritual community
- Deep Humanity
- spiritual collectives
- non-dogmatic spirituality
- Apr 2023
A writer collective is a set of editorial and financial structures designed to give writers the autonomy and upside that they get from writing alone, and the support and security they get from working for a media company.
If the "whole is greater than the sum of its parts" who benefits from the excess value and how is that economically broken up in a fair manner?
- Jan 2023
contractual relations of individual and collectivity (in the formof written ship’s articles specifying shares of booty and ratesof compensation for on-the-job injury
Pirate ships as forms of political organization and collective action!
- Mar 2022
A manifesto about what the Every platform is all about. They're trying to create a new(?) economic model for writers working together.
I'm not really sure how this is dramatically different from prior efforts or if the economic incentives are actually properly aligned here. Many writers without critically looking at the whole may be led here as much by marketing hype as anything else. It almost sounds like they're recreating The Huffington Post, but giving away some of the value up front instead of leaving all the value in one person's hand for a future sale.
Who owns the copyright of the created works? Are editors and proofreaders just work for hire here? What about their interests?
If we decide to part ways, Leads can leave with a copy of their email list.
While a writer may leave a collective with their email list, do they necessarily benefit from having helped to get a going concern off the ground in the first place? Where does that slice of value sit? Do they also collect a multiple of the present value of the concern the way one might in buying a pre-existing business from another?
You also need to design a compensation structure that pays writers what they’re worth.
A writer's collective trying to gather writers using the bait that they've managed to crack the problem of "paying writers what they're worth" seems to be a lot of hype.
This seems to put the already extant fear into a writer's mind that they're not being paid enough. Doesn't the broader economics of a capitalistic system already solve this issue? Where are the inequalities? What about paying the website designers and developers? What about the advertising and other marketing people?