Chain, economical flove
We care about things as closer extensions of our own body are
The social function of private property recommends that the authority over the thing serving for the thing to be cared and for the caretaker to be influenced for fulfilling the function for which it was made. On the contrary, we are mostly using private property appeals for our things not to be used by others. But then things get infra-used, and so property loses all its so-called social function.
The more you want or need to protect your exclusive use of certain goods, the more you have concerns, the more you have to invest in security and the experiences / relationships become more scary, less loving. We overprotect our things because we don’t trust much how others will use them, but we mistrust others mainly because:
1. It is hard to calculate our own future sustainability, i.e. We may regret to gift something we could rather better have have sold it to get other resources we need.
2. We don’t want to get more involved with them because of that. When we let others use our things, we are no longer «so» separated from other people. The relationship created by the use of a the thing acquires a certain «familiar atmosphere», (that is the deep private property… see trustful)
A place for having a better life through the providing of the things we need for doing what we love
Let’s protect the things each one more care and let achieving their use by others, increase the quality of the offered things themselves and the relations proposed with them.
Better markets and jobs
Things by themselves bring more freedom when they are the more ecological, crafted and accessible possible. Consumerism of these should be incentived, if any.
The things we offer are more material parts of us. We need these market spaces to be the better connected to our profiles and to our social projects.
More Jobs naturally flow when efforts are specialized, can be put anytime and match each others interests better.
Satisfactory use is beneficial
The final use of the thing magnifies the entire chain of production of the thing. Making things used more satisfactorily is a nice mirroring for improving personal and social relationships.
Letting other people using your things in a satisfactory way for both and your surroundings directly brings a large immaterial benefit. We just need to give sustainability security to offerors to feel more confident for letting others more freely using them, because it is done for their own benefit as well!
The minimum confidence can be given with information added at some apps, and the great guarantee can be the dissuasion of a system-market in which we all want to be (so we are more afraid of having a bad reputation there).
Fear can be justified because we do not trust each other, but often we do not trust the other because we do not know anything about him. If we knew a little bit more about each other (i.e. flovely reputation), I’m sure we could trust it a bit more, and maybe, instead of not offering the key to our house, we would tend to lend it to him or her more easily.
Licensing the use of things makes more clear the relationship between the people involved. It definetely helps to increase more trust among people who still do not know themselves enough. Then, when the confidence between a requester and an offeror increases, the conditions of use could be more ligther and informally specified.
Licensing helps offerors to find solutions for the I don’t know you enough so i don’t lend it to you
Licensing also helps a requester in not having to over-rely in the subjectivity of the offeror and his-her other possible derivated abuses.
Acknowledged peaks management within the flove network
Exposing data types ranks transparents design & analitics.
The more a user could access (display and share as wanted) his-her Activity statistics, the better.
The more valueable (higher ranked) data added, the better.
The more the system could incentivate (reward) adding of valueable data, the better.
The more the rewards can also come in a material form, from the closer person to us and with the highest social impact too, the better.
= Let’s get to suggest the lovelier actions, the better ranked (and rewarded) by us, our closer friends and analisers.
Customize(d) favors chain andor smart jobs oracle (Universal Income as a pack…)
Tokens is a way to label some valueable adding to the system. Badges are useful for acknowledging a certain level of token (See more: DAOs, free wages at free project standard, etc).
Since flove.org ranks higher the network activity itself (unforwardable merit) than the ammount of flovens anyone could buy without interacting in the network, these bought flovens shouldn’t imply a risk for the system and it should be the users themselves the ones who give the value to them, in the top of what crypto exchanges would say.
For example: It could have more merit for you within the system to accept some hours from someone to you than his-her $ converted in flovens to be given to you. Everyone is free to offer you any $ for anything you own. The freedom for negotiating the value of the exchange remains. As another example: One can say my 2 TrueLove Hours would cost you 4 Hours of whatever i would want from you (that you agree to, obviously…).
We could specify a flove tokens universal fungibility with (material) time (i.e. Hours). This token called Flove Hours can be further limited (a priori) to certain activities only, i.e. Essential Hours, TrueLove Hours, …