Blogger “Bonecone” is launching an appeal to develop a complementary currency that could be used in sites using user-generated content, such as YouTube.
Such initiatives are part of a global movement towards peer to peer based exchange systems.
I must admit I have a mixed mind about approaches that aim to monetize immaterial sharing. The reason is the following: sharing through voluntary contributions creates a particular dynamic and creativity that may be crowded out by monetization, even if that monetization is alternative. People who produce something for money, will not produce the same type of expression than when monetization is not the aim. I therefore tend to believe that some form of generalized benefit sharing, that benefits the whole community, is better than revenue-sharing, which creates competition for the scarce good.
Of course, I’m also sympathetic to the need for creators to make a living. But, perhaps not at any price, i.e. can we find ways of sustaining creative practice that do not destroy the open peer to peer dynamics, that therefore respect that sharing is an ethical economy, distinct from the monetary economy?
Does the fact that Bonecone proposes an alternative currency, guarantee the continuation of that ethical economy? If so, why?
What are the general solutions to make sharing sustainable, without creating a competition-for-profit which would destroy the sharing economics?
Thanks for intervening in that debate!