---
# System prepended metadata

title: "\U0001F98D Coordinape Review"
tags: [WPOKT]

---

---
tags: WPOKT
---

# 🦍 Coordinape Review

## Issues
+ Hustle and let the Retro sort it out
    + Contributor does a bunch of work that is not create "value"
    + Reviewers feel pressure to give GIVE to reward the effort over the value
    + Contributor feel entitled to recieve GIVE
+ Difficulty in providing feedback:
    + challenging for people to give feedback on areas in which they lack expertise. 
    + poses a potential issue when tying feedback to funding, especially for freelancers.
+ Concerns about game theory:
    + the team expressed concern in regards to members gaming the system, especially when monetary value is tied in
+ Zero-sum model:
    + The current model feels like a zero-sum game, where praising one person means taking away from others
    + This raised the point that it may not be ideal to have a system where one's recognition comes at the expense of others


## Ideas
+ Baseline portion of the bonus associated with participating in the coordinape. The coordination bonus
    + If you report with significant detail such that one unfamiliar with your 
+ Personal Give distribution system:
    + system where individuals could distribute gifts from their own accounts to others.
    + This system would still involve a zero-sum dynamic, but the gifts would come from the giver's pool.
+ Monetary vs Reputation:
    +  The participants expressed that the concept of monetary tipping did not resonate strongly with them. They saw it as having potential problems when tied to the tool, as it may create issues. However, they recognized the attractiveness of creating a reputation system within regular utilization of the coordinate system.
+ Baseline compensation and performance: 
    + There was a discussion about two possible structures. One approach suggested that everyone receives the same baseline compensation based on stock performance and meeting milestones. Anything beyond that baseline would be ignored or acknowledged separately. This approach seemed to be in contrast with the current system of allocating give based on perceived performance, where every bit of value is identified via coordinate.
+ Holistic reputation system: 
    + The alternative approach discussed involved a more holistic reputation system, where the entire value delivery is considered. This approach may be more challenging to implement and prevent gamification, but it could generate more nuanced and valuable data. The concern was raised about ensuring that participants are not influenced by monetary reasons or hesitant to provide honest feedback or engage in debates.
