Search:
Giving it all away
I get quite a few blank stares when I go to a networking event and explain to people that Debatewise is a not-for-profit. The conversation continues politely for a minute or so afterwards but it's clear they've become disinterested and are looking for someone more rewarding to talk to.I try not to take this personally, after all I'm relatively clean and reasonably polite. I'm not too offended either, they're just trying to make the most of their time. However, I do wonder what it is that's so unattractive about this approach. Originally I thought it was because they're so focussed on making money the idea of a non-profit doesn’t compute. But now I think it's because they're very ambitious and assume we're not.
Thing is, I am ambitious. I want Debatewise to be the Wikipedia of debate. I want us to be the first place people think of when they want to make up their mind. And I think the best way to do this is to become a non-profit. I mean, it's not impossible people would contribute their time and knowledge to a profit-making enterprise, just that they're more likely to do so if the entity isn't trying to make money off them.
Let's say this works and we get loads of traffic. Dan Malvern argued that such sites have a moral responsibility to generate revenue and give it away to good causes. His belief is that not only would they be able to do an enormous amount of good, but also that this would encourage even more people to get involved and thus make the site even more valuable.
So this is the Debatewise grand plan. Build the site, earn money, give it away. The big difference between us and Wikipedia (Dan's example site) is that we're going to involve you in determining which good causes we support.
Here's how it works. Debatewise gives a certain percentage of its shares to staff and investors. The remaining shares (minimum 30%) will be held in trust for site members. You can then collectively decide what to do with the 30% of the profits we've generated. You can choose the charities and the amounts. You can decide if it's a one-off or recurring payment. You can decide just about everything actually.
The fine details of this approach are yet to be worked out, but clearly it will involve debate. It needs to be complex enough so you can have all the control you want, but simple enough so it doesn't take an age to administer. We do have plans for a Governing Body (of which more later) and it may be that's the mechanism we use.
Regardless of how it functions I think this idea is absolutely brilliant (which I can say with all due modesty since it is not my own). I know there are other sites which work on a profit-sharing basis. But none I know of gives all their profits away, nor do they involve their members in deciding how the profits are distributed.
This approach also ties in with dreams I have about the opportunity with Debatewise to model new forms of democracy. But those ideas are too grand even for me to say out loud just yet.