Defining crowdmatching terms and scope

I think this will really help us move forward.

Crowdmatching
A funding method in which each patron in a crowd puts in more (or less) money whenever the crowd's size or donation total increases (or decreases).

This does not specify the rate, the existence of a budget-cap or goal, or whether the crowd changes are via crowd size (e.g. new patrons) or pledge-size.

We should focus within this definition. Any system where one patron’s input remains unchanged while others change is either not crowdmatching or some sort of multi-tiered crowdmatching (or the two patrons are not in the same crowd).

This doesn’t mean that on our platform crowdmatching must always be active. Pledges could be gathered toward crowdmatching that only turns on at a certain point. A goal could be reached and then crowdmatching is turned off.

Note also by the definition: any time a patron’s donation decreases when the crowd donation increases is effectively anti-crowdmatching. Spread-the-burden mechanisms are not themselves crowdmatching, though we could choose to offer them if it fits our Snowdrift.coop mission.

2 Appreciations
crowdmatching pledge
An agreement by a patron to participate in crowdmatching for a specific recipient
match-rate
The rate at which a patron's donation grows (or shrinks) per a minimal change in the crowd (i.e. per patron or per dollar)

The match-rate could be defined per dollar or per patron (or even a combination or mix). While it could be expressed as a large number (e.g. $10 at 10,000 patrons), it is not a threshold point (and any budget-cap or goal-point is a separate part of a mechanism). All match rates function at the lowest level in practice, i.e. $X per patron or $X per dollar etc.

1 Appreciation

“the crowd’s total donations” = money

so this definition implies a dollar goal (when the mechanism works with a goal, which we already agreed on)

and having a dollar goal increases the crowdmatching effect, since each patron can influence the crowdmatching by donating more than the minimum amount (which helps the projects and our mission)

When we would have a crowd-size goal, the definition would be:

A funding method in which each patron in a crowd puts in more (or less) money whenever the crowd size increase (or decrease).

You see that very clear in the case where patrons increase (or decrease) their pledges, while the crowd-size don’t change. The crowd’s total donations increase (or decrease), so having a crowd-size goal is not crowdmatching, since the amount other patrons put is is not changed.

2 Appreciations

All simple-enough mechanisms we’re discussing have just two inputs that define a pledge: match-rate and max (some limit to a patron’s participation in matching).

Thus, we can classify mechanism options with these 4 categories:

  • both max and rate are set by patrons (so can vary within a crowd)
  • both max and rate are fixed by project (patrons only are in or out)
  • fixed goal is set by project, max is set by patrons, so each patron’s match-rate is max/goal
  • rate is set by project, patrons choose max

None of this specifies whether the rates are based on crowd-dollars or crowd-size or even a mix.

It also doesn’t specify what happens when max is hit (which in some models could be by different patrons at different times)

1 Appreciation

With no other change, if a new patron joins, it means there’s an increase in funding. That does not require that the rate or goals are dollar-based.

But you’re right that a crowd-based goal along with patrons changing their rates would mean no change in matching. But I think the definition should be tweaked to include that scenario, though it does seem to be less clear crowdmatching in a sense.

I edited the first post to be less opinionated on this detail.

1 Appreciation

3 posts were split to a new topic: Confusion about crowdmatching terms topic

then the new patron (1) is matched instead of his donation (X$)

you can say patron based vs. donation based matching

we can agree that both are crowdmatching. i just want to point out that this difference exists

I would define crowdmatching like this:

a) Patrons giving for the same cause are a “crowd”.
b) “Matching” can happen in one way, or in both ways and at any “rate”.
c) “Crowdmatching” is a positive financial relation between a crowd and patron.

By that definition a persons input can remain unchanged and serve as a factor for another person and can still be crowdmatching.

This post was flagged and temporarily hidden.