Crowdfunding Facebook Posts?

[Galloism]

No.

But if you publicly start telling everyone that you gave your friend Amy $100 because she gave your friend Sherry a kidney, you're an asshole.

So if you spend $100 dollars on Amy's post... you're an asshole? But if you don't spend any money on her post... then you're not an asshole?

No, if you spend money on her post, you're an irrational idiot. If you give money to her as a gift because she needs money after recovering from kidney surgery, you're probably a nice guy. If you then tell everyone that you gave her money because of that, you're an asshole.

Since you're so fond of Bible verses and stories, try this on for size:

"So when you give to the needy, do not announce it with trumpets, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and on the streets, to be honored by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward in full. But when you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, so that your giving may be in secret. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you.

Matthew 6: 2-4

[Galloism]

Three, I guess.

1) Suffer temporary insanity, such that I would actually bother to send someone a dollar for a facebook post
2) Login to paypal while desperately searching for antipsychotic medication
2) Send money to email address before it kicks in.

You're assuming that you have their e-mail address memorized.

They're all in my address book.

But then again, if you're going to get that granular, we could break down every pixel of mouse movement as a step and every keyboard stroke as a step, which would actually result in fewer steps to send money by paypal than click on a "give" link.

[Xerographica]

You're assuming that you have their e-mail address memorized.

They're all in my address book.

But then again, if you're going to get that granular, we could break down every pixel of mouse movement as a step and every keyboard stroke as a step, which would actually result in fewer steps to send money by paypal than click on a "give" link.

Let me count the steps...

1. Go to Gmail (or wherever)
2. Look up the e-mail address
3. Copy the e-mail address
4. Go to Paypal
5. Login
6. Go the payment page
7. Paste the e-mail address
8. Enter the amount
9. Add a message "This is for your post about donating your kidney"
10. Click the button

It's quite a few steps to give somebody a dollar to show your appreciation for their post. From my perspective, it should always be easier, rather than harder, to give somebody money. The less rigmarole the better.

[Galloism]

They're all in my address book.

But then again, if you're going to get that granular, we could break down every pixel of mouse movement as a step and every keyboard stroke as a step, which would actually result in fewer steps to send money by paypal than click on a "give" link.

Let me count the steps...

1. Go to Gmail (or wherever)
2. Look up the e-mail address
3. Copy the e-mail address
4. Go to Paypal
5. Login
6. Go the payment page
7. Paste the e-mail address
8. Enter the amount
9. Add a message "This is for your post about donating your kidney"
10. Click the button

It's quite a few steps to give somebody a dollar to show your appreciation for their post. From my perspective, it should always be easier, rather than harder, to give somebody money. The less rigmarole the better.

You seem to have forgotten the part where I have to go insane first. In any case, it's fewer steps than that.

1) Ask siri for the email address.
2) Copy to clipboard
3) Ask siri to launch paypal app
4) Login with thumbprint
5) Hit send money, paste email address, send

[Xerographica]

Let me count the steps...

1. Go to Gmail (or wherever)
2. Look up the e-mail address
3. Copy the e-mail address
4. Go to Paypal
5. Login
6. Go the payment page
7. Paste the e-mail address
8. Enter the amount
9. Add a message "This is for your post about donating your kidney"
10. Click the button

It's quite a few steps to give somebody a dollar to show your appreciation for their post. From my perspective, it should always be easier, rather than harder, to give somebody money. The less rigmarole the better.

You seem to have forgotten the part where I have to go insane first. In any case, it's fewer steps than that.

1) Ask siri for the email address.
2) Copy to clipboard
3) Ask siri to launch paypal app
4) Login with thumbprint
5) Hit send money, paste email address, send

It's still a lot more steps than simply clicking the "Like" button. Providing substantial feedback should be just as easy as providing superficial feedback.

[Galloism]

It's still a lot more steps than simply clicking the "Like" button. Providing substantial feedback should be just as easy as providing superficial feedback.

Nah, because the only feedback we would get would be from the economically irrational.

That's probably not valuable.

[Xerographica]

It's still a lot more steps than simply clicking the "Like" button. Providing substantial feedback should be just as easy as providing superficial feedback.

Nah, because the only feedback we would get would be from the economically irrational.

That's probably not valuable.

How many irrational friends do you have?

[Galloism]

Nah, because the only feedback we would get would be from the economically irrational.

That's probably not valuable.

How many irrational friends do you have?

Friends? None.

Acquiantences who happen to be on Facebook? Quite a few.

[Xerographica]

How many irrational friends do you have?

Friends? None.

Acquiantences who happen to be on Facebook? Quite a few.

So your friends wouldn't spend any money on your posts... but your acquaintances would? That doesn't sound very likely.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

No.

But if you publicly start telling everyone that you gave your friend Amy $100 because she gave your friend Sherry a kidney, you're an asshole.

So if you spend $100 dollars on Amy's post... you're an asshole? But if you don't spend any money on her post... then you're not an asshole?

Well, the problem is that making a gift, monetary or otherwise, public, is of bad taste.

You don't give something in public. You do it in private and you don't boast about it, nor do you hold it over someone's head.

Your system would effectively lead to this.

[Galloism]

Friends? None.

Acquiantences who happen to be on Facebook? Quite a few.

So your friends wouldn't spend any money on your posts... but your acquaintances would? That doesn't sound very likely.

Only irrational ones.

So your system sorts based on the most irrational.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Friends? None.

Acquiantences who happen to be on Facebook? Quite a few.

So your friends wouldn't spend any money on your posts... but your acquaintances would? That doesn't sound very likely.

It sounds highly likely, actually.

Friends aren't necessarily your friends out of economic benefit. You're magnanimous to your friends and you offer to help and do things for them at no cost, as such the expectation that they will do something for you at no cost is also great.

[Xerographica]

So your friends wouldn't spend any money on your posts... but your acquaintances would? That doesn't sound very likely.

Only irrational ones.

So your system sorts based on the most irrational.

You think that somebody who donates to the Red Cross is irrational. So we obviously have very different definitions of "irrational".

[Galloism]

Only irrational ones.

So your system sorts based on the most irrational.

You think that somebody who donates to the Red Cross is irrational.

No. Well, kind of. People get "feelz" in the exchange, along with a tax deduction. Whether those feels are themselves rational is a bit of an open question.

So we obviously have very different definitions of "irrational".

Yes. Mine is the economics version.

[Xerographica]

So your friends wouldn't spend any money on your posts... but your acquaintances would? That doesn't sound very likely.

It sounds highly likely, actually.

Friends aren't necessarily your friends out of economic benefit. You're magnanimous to your friends and you offer to help and do things for them at no cost, as such the expectation that they will do something for you at no cost is also great.

It's such a funny thing that everybody is fine with friends giving each other their time... but when time is replaced with money... then everybody starts protesting. Well... unless you're giving somebody money for their birthday, or graduation, or Christmas, or ...

[Xerographica]

You think that somebody who donates to the Red Cross is irrational.

No. Well, kind of. People get "feelz" in the exchange, along with a tax deduction. Whether those feels are themselves rational is a bit of an open question.

So we obviously have very different definitions of "irrational".

Yes. Mine is the economics version.

Really? Please cite your sources.

[Grave_n_idle]

It's such a funny thing that everybody is fine with friends giving each other their time... but when time is replaced with money...

You don't give friends your time.

You share it.

[Camicon]

It's such a funny thing that everybody is fine with friends giving each other their time... but when time is replaced with money...

You don't give friends your time.

You share it.

Share it? I knew I was missing something. I've been sitting next to my friends, passively, with a 1000 yard stare; never understood why they'd walk away after a few minutes.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

It sounds highly likely, actually.

Friends aren't necessarily your friends out of economic benefit. You're magnanimous to your friends and you offer to help and do things for them at no cost, as such the expectation that they will do something for you at no cost is also great.

It's such a funny thing that everybody is fine with friends giving each other their time... but when time is replaced with money... then everybody starts protesting. Well... unless you're giving somebody money for their birthday, or graduation, or Christmas, or ...

Because it is understood your friend is kind of a dick if they start asking for a fee for your time.

[The Two Jerseys]

You think that somebody who donates to the Red Cross is irrational.

No. Well, kind of. People get "feelz" in the exchange, along with a tax deduction. Whether those feels are themselves rational is a bit of an open question.

What if one donates to the Red Cross because they live in Tornado Alley and see it as funding a disaster contingency plan? Seems pretty rational to me.

[Galloism]

No. Well, kind of. People get "feelz" in the exchange, along with a tax deduction. Whether those feels are themselves rational is a bit of an open question.


Yes. Mine is the economics version.

Really? Please cite your sources.

A rational behavior decision-making process is based on making choices that result in the most optimal level of benefit or utility for the individual.

Read more: Rational Behavior http://www.investopedia.com/terms/r/rat ... z4eCMNvXR1

[Galloism]

No. Well, kind of. People get "feelz" in the exchange, along with a tax deduction. Whether those feels are themselves rational is a bit of an open question.

What if one donates to the Red Cross because they live in Tornado Alley and see it as funding a disaster contingency plan? Seems pretty rational to me.

I mean, kind of, particularly if you have a secondary benefit of a tax deduction and feels.

Barring the 'feels' thing, though, and the tax implications, the more individually rational action is to donate nothing and get the benefit of others donations without cost.

[Xerographica]

Really? Please cite your sources.

A rational behavior decision-making process is based on making choices that result in the most optimal level of benefit or utility for the individual.

Read more: Rational Behavior http://www.investopedia.com/terms/r/rat ... z4eCMNvXR1

You're arguing that if somebody spends their money on your Facebook post it's because they are irrational. This would only be true if they didn't derive any utility from your Facebook post. Are you seriously going to argue that you know exactly how much utility people derive from your Facebook posts? Are you seriously going to argue that you're a mind-reader?

[The Two Jerseys]

Read more: Rational Behavior http://www.investopedia.com/terms/r/rat ... z4eCMNvXR1

You're arguing that if somebody spends their money on your Facebook post it's because they are irrational. This would only be true if they didn't derive any utility from your Facebook post. Are you seriously going to argue that you know exactly how much utility people derive from your Facebook posts? Are you seriously going to argue that you're a mind-reader?

What utility did you derive from reading this sentence?

[Grenartia]

There you are on Facebook scrolling through your feed. In one post, your friend Sarah writes that she donated her kidney to your mutual friend Samantha. There's a heartwarming picture attached to the post. Are you going to click the "Like" button? Of course. Will Samantha click the "Like" button? Of course! But doesn't simply clicking the "Like" button seem woefully inadequate?

What if you had the option to spend your money on Sarah's post? Let's say that you spent $3 dollars on Sarah's post. Facebook would take a reasonable cut (5%?) and give the rest to Sarah. How much money would Samantha be willing to spend on Sarah's post? How much money would the crowd be willing to spend on Sarah's post? How much money would Sarah make for donating her kidney to Samantha? Right now it's illegal to sell your kidney. But shouldn't donating your kidney be profitable?

If posts were crowdfunded then you would be able to see and know exactly how much money had been spent on a post. In other words, you would know the value of each and every post on your feed. This would give you the ability to filter out posts that were less valuable than $1 dollar... or $10 dollars... or $100 dollars.

To be sure, trying to figure out how much money to spend on a post would definitely be far more mentally taxing than deciding whether you like a post. But this is exactly why the amount of money spent on a post would be a far more trustworthy indication of its importance. People actually had to use their brains! They had to seriously consider the trade-offs.

Clicking the "Like" button on a post is superficial feedback. There's absolutely no cost/sacrifice. Spending money on a post is substantial feedback. There certainly is a cost/sacrifice.

When the feedback is superficial... then faking it is costless. When the feedback is substantial... then faking it is costly.

The question is... do you want to know what people really think about your posts? I'm guessing that, for most of you, the answer is "NO!!!!" Most people really like to delude themselves into believing that their posts are far more valuable than they truly are. The problem with this delusional mentality is that it results in society suffering from a severe shortage of genuinely beneficial behavior.

If you believe that your photos are exceptionally good... you can share them on Facebook and lots of people might be happy to "Like" them. After all, it doesn't cost them anything to do so. If they don't truly enjoy your photos, then clicking the "Like" button is just a little white lie that can help strengthen the bonds of friendship.

But if you take your photos to the flea market...

Entrepreneurship is the optimal medium for empirically demonstrating the value of an idea. If you really want to know what an idea is worth, if you really want to know how useful it is, take that idea and engage reality with it. Attempt to create value for others, attempt to solve problems within the context of an accountability structure rooted in profit and loss… When you ask people for money in exchange for something you do, you’re going to get more honest feedback than ever before. - T.K. Coleman

Let me add a bit of balance to my post by sharing this video... Michael Sandel: The Moral Limits of Markets. Let me add a bit more balance by sharing this paper by Uri Gneezy... When and Why Incentives (Don't) Work to Modify Behavior.

Ok, so I'm generally not a big fan of public displays of affection (PDA). Could crowdfunding posts be considered PDA? Or is it more like public displays of gratitude (PDG)? Or maybe public displays of nurturing (PDN)? What percentage of the posts on your Facebook feed would you be truly willing to nurture with your money? Would you be willing to monetarily nurture a post about your bff's engagement? Her wedding? Her first baby? Her promotion? Her divorce?

My guess is that once people were more honest with each other then there would be some serious social reshuffling. Superficial friendships would be replaced with substantial friendships. What's your guess?

That's it.

I'm calling it.

You're a Ferengi behind a keyboard. I know your game, Quark.