twilight

>> In my opinion creating these decentralized organizations is not that hard but they will never be able to win against centralized competitors who have clear incentive to win.

Why not? Cannot decentralized organizations also have incentive to win?

Have you participated in Open-Source projects? There is leadership: a few (2-3) the most active contributors. The thing is it's easier to find them if the project is Open-Source. And contributors can make sure in advance they like the project. E.g. I started contributing to someone else's project with lots of stars on GH. And after some period of time became its maintainer and the second leader. If I had to go through interviews first and all that stuff that hiring requires, I would never be there.

Exactly my thoughts. BTW assembly was an intermediary that provided you a platform and handled some stuff in exchange for 10% of projects' revenue. Do you think this platform should have such a role? Can it be just an agent. So, there are many intermediary companies that charge whatever % they want for the benefits and services they find reasonable and many projects. Projects choose their intermediaries and intermediaries choose projects. There is a competition in these groups. The platform gets % of intermediary's %. What do you think?

Good questions. I cannot answer 2-4 yet. As for the (1) I think it should be a collective decision making (voting) where weight of your vote depends on the number of shares you have. And why not to create a form of arbitrage so it is possible for contributors to appeal if there is a need to. As for the selling and buying shares (5), I think it is a good idea. But I'm dead sure it complicates everything from the legal point of view even more. And thus it's not a priority number one. And in the last part, focus and long term goals from whose point of view do you mean exactly?

P.S.: I'll absolutely get in touch with you.