[Webinar Proposal] Mutual Credit / REA Accounting

I think maybe a session about Mutual credit in general, or about ways of empowering groups with a means of value exchange more generally, might be good.

Would anyone else be interested in contributing to / co-creating a session along those lines?

I'd be happy to support Michael, I'm looking at how the covid mutual-aid whatsapp groups could become mutually aiding, rather than gifting

I would like to join and/or offer a session that respects REA accounting - Accounting for a New Economy - economicgroups and reviews - in practice - mutual commitment (aka mutual credit) as an immediate available and testable method for enabling "our" money globally and locally.

This is necessarily a commons venture, or it won't work.

openmoney.cc demonstrates at this server, and delivers what is shown here and here

It was really interesting how the conversation at the end of the last webinar moved on to money and specifically mutual credit ... which seems like something lots of people are interested in discussing... So I am penciling in the 4th June (the last webinar session before the main OPEN 2020 event on 11th and 12th June - full plan still TBC) as a slot for everyone who is interested in this topic to come together and discuss ...

We should aim to be clever with our time together tho - and, as I mentioned after the last webinar - not to use this time to promote our own, or different projects (which would take ages and not necessarily get us anywhere), but to instead talk about an 'open protocol for money'.

At the Open Credit Network we are working towards the vision outlined by Matt Slater and Tim Jenkins in the Credit Commons - which is an open protocol which aims to network together different mutual credit networks. It is not a technology, or a platform, but the first steps towards a set of rules for 'value flow' which are truly platform & technology agnostic ... however, it leaves some HUGE gaps, which clearly need addressing for it, or anything like it, to become a reality - namely: Governance (no small issue!) and how to manage 'trade balances' (i.e. what do you do when all the credit flows from e.g. the UK to e.g. China - because the goods flow the other way - and the UK network reaches it's 'credit limit'!?)

I would like to see if we can focus our discussions on some of these specific challenges, to provide input into the Credit Commons protocol (for which a few test networks are currently being deployed) or any other open protocol for "money".

I like the look of REA accounting - but don't know enough about it, or why specifically it's necessary for an open protocol for 'money'? But I'm keen to explore all ideas which help accelerate the transition to a collaborative economy... so maybe we can keep exchanging ideas here in the lead up to the 4th June?

Oli

Oli - transcription (and notes) on the end of the last webinar. I've highlighted and indented parts I thought relevant.

And, on the demo openmoney server, a timebank (or any other m/c currency form) and wallet does install in secs. Governance and such, not so fast.

Hi Michael,
Can you explain a bit more about what the demo openmoney server provides...?
How it works? How people can use it etc?
I logged in and saw the attached but struggled to know what I was looking at exactly!

Could you also explain a bit more about this comment in the doc:

Oli -  but obviously Michael's open API is an API for a specific type of money that works in a specific way, 

Michael - (not so - the openmoney API applies to ALL money, no matter how it works, or is designed - michael)

i.e. how does it apply to ALL money? Maybe you could give an example of how an existing mutual credit network, and/or an existing currency, could plug in and use it? And how trades between different networks would work?

Thanks!

The OM API provides a way to manage recursively-nested closures (namespaces), each enclosing an arbitrary set of stewards (users) and accounts (scalar ledgers). The interface illustrated above is just one example, convenient for payments/transfers between metrically-(/dimensionally-)equivalent accounts but constraining usage to that application ... implementing open money principles (and, as such, a variety attenuator). The API (rather than this interface) can be used to build much richer structures, including compound/vector measures - open metrics. (The start of a "development roadmap" can be seen at https://github.com/jethro-swan/om_development_roadmap - but the overall vision is much larger.)

Something I've been thinking about: I think the vision of the Credit Commons differs from the vision behind Trustlines Protocol mainly because it excludes the possibility for bilateral credit relationships, and (as I understand it) really only wants multilateral relationships. That was also my takeaway from this interesting blog post in which Matthew Slater discusses differences in the definition of mutual credit, and offers his own definition: https://matslats.net/definition-mutual-credit.

So I'd be interested in having a discussion on this particular question: whether it's necessary to mutualize the risk of default, or whether doing so creates a higher barrier to entry and thus makes it more difficult for the average person to participate.

A corollary question is whether we should design technology that guides (or restricts) people into setting up credit systems based on these agreed principles, or instead design technology that gives them more freedom to participate in whatever systems they can think of... even if we disagree with the principles behind certain system designs (i.e. focusing on technical interoperability vs. ideals-based interoperability).

As I see it, Trustlines Protocol is halfway to realizing the vision of the Credit Commons, as it can host multilateral credit relationships in addition to bilateral credit relationships. Trustlines, as it is used right now, is essentially the meta-exchange or "public" layer suggested in Credit Commons vision, but it is also compatible with other suggested features.

I'd be interested in discussing which other tech platforms are similar, and what specifically differentiates them, whether it be vision/governance/user base/___. While I understand the hesitance to spend too much time on the details of each platform, I still think it's very worthwhile to talk about them, especially because I'm still unsure whether the diversity of platforms reflects a healthy diversity of ideas, or instead a need to improve collaboration methods and knowledge-sharing.

And I think we should expect to do follow-up sessions that go into more depth on individual projects. There was some enthusiasm the previous time I posted this session proposal for Trustlines Protocol, so I suspect there is still interest.

Can you explain a bit more about what the demo openmoney server provides...?
How it works? How people can use it etc?
I logged in and saw the attached but struggled to know what I was looking at exactly!

So you went to htttps://om-18.lrc.org.uk, and clicked "Sign up"

(note email is irrelevant, not used - so [email protected] is good enough / save your passward, it may not be recoverable)

Now you are on the payments screen

Enter "olisb.cc" in "To Account" , any text in "Description", key or text any amount, and hit the + button

Check your Accounts page, see the time-stamped entry in your ledger (and one from testa.cc, who is i)

You can use this interface to direct any REA type statement - from, to, description, currency, amount is "ftdca" - from your account name to anyone else (whose account name you know) registered in that currency on this server.

It works like a checkbook, for both expense and income.

On starting cc there's further explanation on how to upload datasets, for instance to start a bio-regional ecosystem of currencies, including timebanks, LETSsytems, b2b, joint ventures, and anything that is REAlisable. Not just one timebank in a few clicks, but as many of them as you like.

Could you also explain a bit more about this comment in the doc:

Oli -  but obviously Michael's open API is an API for a specific type of money that works in a specific way, 

Michael - (not so - the openmoney API applies to ALL money, no matter how it works, or is designed - michael)

My point here is that what you think obvious - and assert - is actually quite wrong, and misleading you. But not at all uncommon - as the other highlights in the transcript show.

The openmoney api can be applied to record / account for the stocks and flows of any nameable resources between any nameable agents in any series of conceivable events - open metrics (Les Moore - 2013) is the most comprehensive description.

Metrics can be money, if those who write them choose to say so

i.e. how does it apply to ALL money?

think of it as a personally configurable REAbacus for instance (ftdca)

from knitter, to blacksheep, received - black and full, bags of wool, 3

what it does NOT do is handle assets - openmoney is NOT a bank

it just keeps accounts between agents as agents record and means to them what they say it means to them

Maybe you could give an example of how an existing mutual credit network, and/or an existing currency, could plug in and use it?

any system currently running as a singular, if they want to go wider, further, smaller, more variety. more autonomy for users could add this to what they have

a system administration can either move their data there, or open a link to it for their trusted users, or apply the api in their own user service

even a bank - or credit union - can manage this. Really.

Or a poker game, or indeed a bio-regional simulation role playing game - which is the current focus of short term development

And how trades between different networks would work?

in my experience trades between different systems is a problem - but it's your problem, not mine.

when you think of systems as incorporations (whether cooperative or not) whose group behaviour sustains the value of their currency, you are entering a world of pain and problems my friend - governance, standards, balance of payments, bancor and beyond

personally - I don't think it's important anyway, there are immediate work-arounds for any two agents each with accounts in two systems to counter-trade as they choose in their own terms and without entailing others in their affairs.

I think it comes down to whether to co-operate by organization or organise by co-operation. Both are of course possible, and indeed compatible - but they are quite different approaches from different perspectives.

Let's continue to explore the distinctions, by all means.

Thank Michael,

Really useful explanations - so from what I understand, this system is simply another 'ledger'...
It's not a protocol.

It does have an API, which means you could possibly use it to handle exchanges between different exchanges - but that would be pretty complicated to set up and very complicated to use up since AFAIKS there is no way mechanism to handle 'exchange rates' (or 'conversion rates' in Credit Commons language) between different currencies, is that right?

As far as I can tell the CC system could be useful for handling value exchanges if everyone was using that system - but the same could be said for Trustlines (and almost every other MC ledger) many of which also come with "Directory" systems showing and matching "offers" and "wants" which (to me at least) seems essential to enabling trade.... and many of the other systems I have seen have much nicer UI (no offense!) - which (again, imho) is essential for user uptake.

So, from what I can tell, the Credit Commons proposal remains the closest thing I have seen to "an open protocol for money".