982
edits
Discord Messages: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 570: | Line 570: | ||
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10606-017-9267-z | https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10606-017-9267-z | ||
|Link=https://discord.com/channels/1029514961782849607/1041061650977009704/1041195133028274206 | |Link=https://discord.com/channels/1029514961782849607/1041061650977009704/1041195133028274206 | ||
}}{{Message | |||
|Author=joelchan86 | |||
|Avatar=https://cdn.discordapp.com/avatars/322545403876868096/6dd171845a7a4e30603d98ae510c77b8.png?size=1024 | |||
|Date Sent=22-11-13 03:43:07 | |||
|Channel=incentive-mechanisms | |||
|Text=a bit further afield, i'd point to the [[Open Science Framework]] as a thoughtful case study in incentive mechanism design focused on integration into *intrinsic* benefits (i'm more thoughtful about my science, i can easily document things so i don't forget them) | |||
this podcast interview is a decent look into how he thinks about things: https://everythinghertz.com/69 | |||
if i read him right, i sort of agree that infrastructure (possibility) an usability and communities (norms) are prior to / foundational to incentives and policy. top-down incentives and policies that don't align with existing norms and usable practices may risk incentivizing 'just comply with it' practices or just fall flat, like some data sharing mandates. | |||
|Link=https://discord.com/channels/1029514961782849607/1041061650977009704/1041196489214537728 | |||
}} | }} | ||