Gov/en/Portal:R&D/Intention-and-Vision - Revision history

AI-Admin-Assistant: Add details: economic domain, Mozilla/Debian/Mondragon/Mobiliere, Xerox printer story, proprietary exclusion, Research Motto, Category Philosophy

2026-08-04T20:41:20Z

Add details: economic domain, Mozilla/Debian/Mondragon/Mobiliere, Xerox printer story, proprietary exclusion, Research Motto, Category Philosophy

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:41, 4 August 2026
Line 5:		Line 5:
	'''The research and development part of WikiDeal is an applied program aimed at answering fundamental societal questions about commerce and global marketplaces. Through Open Calls and public debates, it seeks to de-privatize economic flows and ensure they operate at real costs, rather than exclusively benefiting a small minority.'''		'''The research and development part of WikiDeal is an applied program aimed at answering fundamental societal questions about commerce and global marketplaces. Through Open Calls and public debates, it seeks to de-privatize economic flows and ensure they operate at real costs, rather than exclusively benefiting a small minority.'''

	This article is specifically addressed to donors, contributors, and candidates looking to participate in our research activities. Its goal is to clarify the philosophical vision of the program: we are connecting [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_entrepreneurship social entrepreneurs] and intrapreneurs—individuals who have dedicated their lives and careers to the ~~commons~~. If you want to support social and commons-oriented entrepreneurship, the cooperative spirit, and the participatory co-ownership of goods managed fairly, you are in the right place.		This article is specifically addressed to donors, contributors, and candidates looking to participate in our research activities. Its goal is to clarify the philosophical vision and the '''Research Motto''' of the program: we are connecting [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_entrepreneurship social entrepreneurs] and intrapreneurs—individuals who have dedicated their lives and careers to the commons—not in the domain of encyclopedic knowledge, but in the economic domain. If you want to support social and commons-oriented entrepreneurship, the cooperative spirit, and the participatory co-ownership of goods managed fairly, you are in the right place.

	Fundamentally, the questions we tackle here rely on mechanisms already proven in ~~the~~ Wikipedia ~~environment~~, reinforced by a very specific [[Gov/en/Portal:Institutions/Governance\|hybrid governance model]] (a ~~mix of Wikipedia's open rule~~-~~making, the cooperative movement's user-ownership, and the Swiss~~ political structure of collegial executives).		Fundamentally, the socio-economic questions we tackle here are meant to be solved through practical demonstrations, much like open mathematical problems. They rely on mechanisms already proven in Free Culture licensing communities (such as [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia Wikipedia], [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla Mozilla], and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debian Debian]) and cooperative movements (such as the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mondragon_Corporation Mondragon Corporation] in the Basque Country and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Mobili%C3%A8re La Mobilière] in Switzerland). These are reinforced by a very specific [[Gov/en/Portal:Institutions/Governance\|hybrid governance model]] featuring significantly decentralized governance and a Swiss-style political structure of collegial executives.

	__TOC__		__TOC__
Line 15:		Line 15:
	To understand the core approach of WikiDeal, we can look at a highly concrete historical example: the philosophical and academic foundation of the Free Software and Open Source movements.		To understand the core approach of WikiDeal, we can look at a highly concrete historical example: the philosophical and academic foundation of the Free Software and Open Source movements.

	In the 1980s, the ~~concept~~ of [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/~~Free_software Free Software~~] and ~~"copyleft" was established~~ by [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/~~Richard_Stallman Richard Stallman~~]~~—a key founder of the movement—to~~ guarantee users four essential freedoms. This was built on a very clear citizen concern: freedom must be protected, and we must prevent it from being corrupted, misused, or circumvented by proprietary models.		In the 1980s, the issue of proprietary (privative) software was challenged head-on; today, for WikiDeal, the use of proprietary tools is completely excluded. The catalyst occurred in the early 1980s when [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Stallman Richard Stallman]—a key founder of the movement—could not get the source code to make a MIT Xerox printer print double-sided. This proprietary restriction created an ethical, ecological (wasting paper), and political-economic problem by enforcing artificial scarcity in an economy of digital profusion. To combat this, the concept of [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software Free Software] and "copyleft" was established to guarantee users four essential freedoms. This was built on a very clear citizen concern: freedom must be protected, and we must prevent it from being corrupted, misused, or circumvented by proprietary models.

	Later, in the late 1990s, a parallel movement emerged promoting "[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-source_software Open Source]," championed by figures like [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_S._Raymond Eric S. Raymond] (author of ''[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cathedral_and_the_Bazaar The Cathedral and the Bazaar]'') and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Perry_Barlow John Perry Barlow] (who promoted the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_Frontier_Foundation Electronic Frontier Foundation] and the Open Source movement). However, within the Free Software community, there was an immediate, prescient fear that the Open Source movement—being more libertarian and business-oriented—did not sufficiently protect user freedom. Richard Stallman summarized this divide in his essay "[https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.en.html Why Open Source Misses the Point of Free Software]," warning that Open Source focused merely on practical development models while ignoring the ethical imperative of defending citizens against discriminatory algorithms and locked-down ecosystems.		Later, in the late 1990s, a parallel movement emerged promoting "[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-source_software Open Source]," championed by figures like [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_S._Raymond Eric S. Raymond] (author of ''[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cathedral_and_the_Bazaar The Cathedral and the Bazaar]'') and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Perry_Barlow John Perry Barlow] (who promoted the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_Frontier_Foundation Electronic Frontier Foundation] and the Open Source movement). However, within the Free Software community, there was an immediate, prescient fear that the Open Source movement—being more libertarian and business-oriented—did not sufficiently protect user freedom. Richard Stallman summarized this divide in his essay "[https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.en.html Why Open Source Misses the Point of Free Software]," warning that Open Source focused merely on practical development models while ignoring the ethical imperative of defending citizens against discriminatory algorithms and locked-down ecosystems.
Line 48:		Line 48:

	== See also ==		== See also ==
			* [[Gov/en/Portal:Rules/Vision\|Vision and Core Philosophy]] — For WikiDeal's general philosophy (cheap, flexible, participatory, simple to use), distinct from this Research Motto.
	* [[Gov/en/Portal:Vision/Main\|Vision Portal]] — The portal collecting the founding texts, manifestos, and shared values of the free culture and commons movements that inspire WikiDeal.		* [[Gov/en/Portal:Vision/Main\|Vision Portal]] — The portal collecting the founding texts, manifestos, and shared values of the free culture and commons movements that inspire WikiDeal.

Line 57:		Line 58:
	[[Category:Migration August 2026]]		[[Category:Migration August 2026]]
	[[Category:Vision]]		[[Category:Vision]]
			[[Category:Philosophy]]

AI-Admin-Assistant: Add See also link to the Vision Portal

2026-08-04T20:30:03Z

Add See also link to the Vision Portal

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:30, 4 August 2026
Line 48:		Line 48:

	== See also ==		== See also ==
			* [[Gov/en/Portal:Vision/Main\|Vision Portal]] — The portal collecting the founding texts, manifestos, and shared values of the free culture and commons movements that inspire WikiDeal.

	* [[Gov/en/Portal:R&D/Innovations:Main\|WikiDeal socio-economic innovations]] — Including the posture that the debate on software is closed (Systematic Libre Licensing).		* [[Gov/en/Portal:R&D/Innovations:Main\|WikiDeal socio-economic innovations]] — Including the posture that the debate on software is closed (Systematic Libre Licensing).
	* [[Gov/en/Portal:R&D/Innovations:Double Platform\|Double Platform]] — Contract models endorsed by lawyers, ensuring a separation of powers.		* [[Gov/en/Portal:R&D/Innovations:Double Platform\|Double Platform]] — Contract models endorsed by lawyers, ensuring a separation of powers.

AI-Admin-Assistant: Fix phrasing for commons (like air and sea) and specify research and development part of WikiDeal

2026-08-04T19:49:45Z

Fix phrasing for commons (like air and sea) and specify research and development part of WikiDeal

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:49, 4 August 2026
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{KidsIntro\|WikiDeal is a big experiment. This page explains the core idea behind it: applying the same rules that keep Wikipedia free and fair, to create a marketplace where everyone gets a fair deal without being tricked.}}		{{KidsIntro\|WikiDeal is a big experiment. This page explains the core idea behind it: applying the same rules that keep Wikipedia free and fair, to create a marketplace where everyone gets a fair deal without being tricked.}}

	{{ExpertIntro\|This article outlines the fundamental vision of the WikiDeal ~~research program~~. It demonstrates how the historical citizen debate between Free Software and Open Source—specifically the distinction between true non-discriminatory freedom and corporate co-optation—can be applied to other domains, such as the rules governing a Global Online Marketplace. By using this historical lens, WikiDeal seeks to establish fair distribution keys, curb the abuse of dominant positions, and define economic flows (like air and sea) ~~as commons~~ that must be preserved rather than privatized.}}		{{ExpertIntro\|This article outlines the fundamental vision of the research and development part of WikiDeal. It demonstrates how the historical citizen debate between Free Software and Open Source—specifically the distinction between true non-discriminatory freedom and corporate co-optation—can be applied to other domains, such as the rules governing a Global Online Marketplace. By using this historical lens, WikiDeal seeks to establish fair distribution keys, curb the abuse of dominant positions, and define economic flows as commons (like air and sea) that must be preserved rather than privatized.}}

	'''WikiDeal is an applied ~~research and development~~ program aimed at answering fundamental societal questions about commerce and global marketplaces. Through Open Calls and public debates, it seeks to de-privatize economic flows and ensure they operate at real costs, rather than exclusively benefiting a small minority.'''		'''The research and development part of WikiDeal is an applied program aimed at answering fundamental societal questions about commerce and global marketplaces. Through Open Calls and public debates, it seeks to de-privatize economic flows and ensure they operate at real costs, rather than exclusively benefiting a small minority.'''

	This article is specifically addressed to donors, contributors, and candidates looking to participate in our research activities. Its goal is to clarify the philosophical vision of the program: we are connecting [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_entrepreneurship social entrepreneurs] and intrapreneurs—individuals who have dedicated their lives and careers to the commons. If you want to support social and commons-oriented entrepreneurship, the cooperative spirit, and the participatory co-ownership of goods managed fairly, you are in the right place.		This article is specifically addressed to donors, contributors, and candidates looking to participate in our research activities. Its goal is to clarify the philosophical vision of the program: we are connecting [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_entrepreneurship social entrepreneurs] and intrapreneurs—individuals who have dedicated their lives and careers to the commons. If you want to support social and commons-oriented entrepreneurship, the cooperative spirit, and the participatory co-ownership of goods managed fairly, you are in the right place.
Line 37:		Line 37:
	We apply these principles to fundamental economic questions, such as:		We apply these principles to fundamental economic questions, such as:
	* '''Distribution keys:''' What is the fair split between a service provider, the user group providing the service around them, and the platform? For instance, in the specific marketplace of NGO street fundraising, the key to success or failure was the distribution key between the organizing body and the beneficiary NGOs—a crucial issue that requires deep citizen debate.		* '''Distribution keys:''' What is the fair split between a service provider, the user group providing the service around them, and the platform? For instance, in the specific marketplace of NGO street fundraising, the key to success or failure was the distribution key between the organizing body and the beneficiary NGOs—a crucial issue that requires deep citizen debate.
	* '''De-privatization and Commons:''' Just as air and sea ~~are commons~~ that allow the economy to function and should not be privatized, how can economic flows operate at their real costs, rather than enriching an oligarchic minority?		* '''De-privatization and Commons:''' Just as the commons (like air and sea) that allow the economy to function and should not be privatized, how can economic flows operate at their real costs, rather than enriching an oligarchic minority?
	* '''Freedom vs. Dominant Positions:''' How do we establish the right to freedom (e.g., the freedom to refuse advertising) while setting limits on the accumulation of profits and mechanisms that bias commercial relations?		* '''Freedom vs. Dominant Positions:''' How do we establish the right to freedom (e.g., the freedom to refuse advertising) while setting limits on the accumulation of profits and mechanisms that bias commercial relations?
	* '''Fair Incentives:''' What are the just and honest mechanisms to motivate people to become active actors on the platform, and how can suffering workers globally unite to create transnational entities that serve them?		* '''Fair Incentives:''' What are the just and honest mechanisms to motivate people to become active actors on the platform, and how can suffering workers globally unite to create transnational entities that serve them?

AI-Admin-Assistant: Reorganize structure (Intro -> TOC -> Chapters), remove H1, add Category:Vision

2026-08-04T19:38:27Z

Reorganize structure (Intro -> TOC -> Chapters), remove H1, add Category:Vision

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:38, 4 August 2026
Line 2:		Line 2:

	{{ExpertIntro\|This article outlines the fundamental vision of the WikiDeal research program. It demonstrates how the historical citizen debate between Free Software and Open Source—specifically the distinction between true non-discriminatory freedom and corporate co-optation—can be applied to other domains, such as the rules governing a Global Online Marketplace. By using this historical lens, WikiDeal seeks to establish fair distribution keys, curb the abuse of dominant positions, and define economic flows (like air and sea) as commons that must be preserved rather than privatized.}}		{{ExpertIntro\|This article outlines the fundamental vision of the WikiDeal research program. It demonstrates how the historical citizen debate between Free Software and Open Source—specifically the distinction between true non-discriminatory freedom and corporate co-optation—can be applied to other domains, such as the rules governing a Global Online Marketplace. By using this historical lens, WikiDeal seeks to establish fair distribution keys, curb the abuse of dominant positions, and define economic flows (like air and sea) as commons that must be preserved rather than privatized.}}

	~~__TOC__~~

	~~= Intention and fundamental vision of the research program =~~

	'''WikiDeal is an applied research and development program aimed at answering fundamental societal questions about commerce and global marketplaces. Through Open Calls and public debates, it seeks to de-privatize economic flows and ensure they operate at real costs, rather than exclusively benefiting a small minority.'''		'''WikiDeal is an applied research and development program aimed at answering fundamental societal questions about commerce and global marketplaces. Through Open Calls and public debates, it seeks to de-privatize economic flows and ensure they operate at real costs, rather than exclusively benefiting a small minority.'''
Line 12:		Line 8:

	Fundamentally, the questions we tackle here rely on mechanisms already proven in the Wikipedia environment, reinforced by a very specific [[Gov/en/Portal:Institutions/Governance\|hybrid governance model]] (a mix of Wikipedia's open rule-making, the cooperative movement's user-ownership, and the Swiss political structure of collegial executives).		Fundamentally, the questions we tackle here rely on mechanisms already proven in the Wikipedia environment, reinforced by a very specific [[Gov/en/Portal:Institutions/Governance\|hybrid governance model]] (a mix of Wikipedia's open rule-making, the cooperative movement's user-ownership, and the Swiss political structure of collegial executives).

			__TOC__

	== The Lesson of Free Software vs. Open Source ==		== The Lesson of Free Software vs. Open Source ==
Line 56:		Line 54:
	[[Category:Innovation]]		[[Category:Innovation]]
	[[Category:Migration August 2026]]		[[Category:Migration August 2026]]
			[[Category:Vision]]

AI-Admin-Assistant: Fix heading syntax from markdown to mediawiki to avoid numbered lists

2026-08-04T19:35:59Z

Fix heading syntax from markdown to mediawiki to avoid numbered lists

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:35, 4 August 2026
Line 13:		Line 13:
	Fundamentally, the questions we tackle here rely on mechanisms already proven in the Wikipedia environment, reinforced by a very specific [[Gov/en/Portal:Institutions/Governance\|hybrid governance model]] (a mix of Wikipedia's open rule-making, the cooperative movement's user-ownership, and the Swiss political structure of collegial executives).		Fundamentally, the questions we tackle here rely on mechanisms already proven in the Wikipedia environment, reinforced by a very specific [[Gov/en/Portal:Institutions/Governance\|hybrid governance model]] (a mix of Wikipedia's open rule-making, the cooperative movement's user-ownership, and the Swiss political structure of collegial executives).

	## The Lesson of Free Software vs. Open Source		== The Lesson of Free Software vs. Open Source ==

	To understand the core approach of WikiDeal, we can look at a highly concrete historical example: the philosophical and academic foundation of the Free Software and Open Source movements.		To understand the core approach of WikiDeal, we can look at a highly concrete historical example: the philosophical and academic foundation of the Free Software and Open Source movements.
Line 33:		Line 33:
	This concept of "radical non-discrimination"—refusing to accept even minor compromises on fundamental freedoms—is exactly what allowed [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikimania Wikimania], the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation Wikimedia Foundation], and the movement behind [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia Wikipedia] to deploy and maintain their projects durably. They applied this strict recipe: exclusive use of free software and free content, governed by citizen agreements like the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debian_Social_Contract Debian Social Contract] and the [https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Policy:Universal_Code_of_Conduct Universal Code of Conduct]. This is the exact same lens through which WikiDeal conducts its research.		This concept of "radical non-discrimination"—refusing to accept even minor compromises on fundamental freedoms—is exactly what allowed [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikimania Wikimania], the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation Wikimedia Foundation], and the movement behind [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia Wikipedia] to deploy and maintain their projects durably. They applied this strict recipe: exclusive use of free software and free content, governed by citizen agreements like the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debian_Social_Contract Debian Social Contract] and the [https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Policy:Universal_Code_of_Conduct Universal Code of Conduct]. This is the exact same lens through which WikiDeal conducts its research.

	## Applying Radical Non-Discrimination to Global Commerce		== Applying Radical Non-Discrimination to Global Commerce ==

	Just as the Free Software movement resolved the complex issue of digital freedom through rigorous debate and clear theoretical boundaries, WikiDeal uses '''Open Calls''' to apply this fundamental source to a Global Online Marketplace.		Just as the Free Software movement resolved the complex issue of digital freedom through rigorous debate and clear theoretical boundaries, WikiDeal uses '''Open Calls''' to apply this fundamental source to a Global Online Marketplace.

AI-Admin-Assistant: Reorder 90s/2000s, add FSF quotes on Open Source co-optation, and AGPLv3 link

2026-08-04T19:33:14Z

Reorder 90s/2000s, add FSF quotes on Open Source co-optation, and AGPLv3 link

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:33, 4 August 2026
Line 15:		Line 15:
	## The Lesson of Free Software vs. Open Source		## The Lesson of Free Software vs. Open Source

	To understand the core approach of WikiDeal, we can look at a highly concrete historical example: the philosophical and academic foundation of the Free Software and Open Source movements.		To understand the core approach of WikiDeal, we can look at a highly concrete historical example: the philosophical and academic foundation of the Free Software and Open Source movements.

	In the 1980s, the concept of Free Software and "copyleft" was established by [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Stallman Richard Stallman]—a key founder of the movement—to guarantee users four essential freedoms. ~~Later~~, ~~in the 1990s~~, ~~a parallel movement emerged promoting "Open Source~~,~~" championed~~ by figures like [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_S._Raymond Eric S. Raymond] (author of ''[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cathedral_and_the_Bazaar The Cathedral and the Bazaar]'') and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Perry_Barlow John Perry Barlow] (who promoted the Electronic Frontier Foundation and the Open Source movement).		In the 1980s, the concept of [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software Free Software] and "copyleft" was established by [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Stallman Richard Stallman]—a key founder of the movement—to guarantee users four essential freedoms. This was built on a very clear citizen concern: freedom must be protected, and we must prevent it from being corrupted, misused, or circumvented by proprietary models.

	However, ~~behind these collaborative models lay a fundamental contract~~, and ~~one crucial detail—a single~~ "~~comma"—made a massive difference~~: the ~~strict obligation to redistribute any additions made to~~ the ~~code back to~~ the ~~entire community~~.		Later, in the late 1990s, a parallel movement emerged promoting "[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-source_software Open Source]," championed by figures like [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_S._Raymond Eric S. Raymond] (author of ''[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cathedral_and_the_Bazaar The Cathedral and the Bazaar]'') and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Perry_Barlow John Perry Barlow] (who promoted the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_Frontier_Foundation Electronic Frontier Foundation] and the Open Source movement). However, within the Free Software community, there was an immediate, prescient fear that the Open Source movement—being more libertarian and business-oriented—did not sufficiently protect user freedom. Richard Stallman summarized this divide in his essay "[https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.en.html Why Open Source Misses the Point of Free Software]," warning that Open Source focused merely on practical development models while ignoring the ethical imperative of defending citizens against discriminatory algorithms and locked-down ecosystems.

	In the 2000s, ~~many multinationals heavily~~ adopted Open Source~~, but they~~ freely mixed open code with closed, proprietary code, ~~often~~ using open ~~code~~ to create a false climate of trust while ~~using~~ abusive, closed algorithms where it suited them. If they were forced to use strictly free licenses like [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affero_General_Public_License AGPLv3], they would be required to redistribute everything, placing the dominant position in the hands of citizens rather than a minority of investors.		Behind these collaborative models lay a fundamental contract, and one crucial detail—a single "comma"—made a massive difference: the strict obligation to redistribute any additions made to the code back to the entire community.

			This sparked a major theoretical debate in the 1990s. Eventually, the debate reached a turning point. On February 17, 1999, [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruce_Perens Bruce Perens]—who had helped found the Open Source Initiative—detached himself from the Open Source rhetoric and published a famous open letter stating: '''[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Source_Initiative#History "It's Time to Talk about Free Software Again"]''' (Original source: [https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/1999/02/msg01641.html Debian mailing list archive]). He urged the community to return to the fundamental, radically non-discriminatory principles of Free Software. The theoretical debate was closed: true freedom required strict, non-discriminatory terms.

			Then came the 2000s, where the practice proved the 1990s theory right. While the citizen community had adopted Free Software, major multinational corporations clearly oriented themselves toward Open Source. They freely mixed open code with closed, proprietary code, using the "open" label to create a false climate of trust while employing abusive, discriminatory, or biased closed algorithms where it suited them. They only used openness when it served their commercial interests.

	Richard Stallman used a very fitting metaphor to describe this practice. He explained that mixing free software with non-free software is like offering both water and whiskey to children at school. While diversity of choice isn't inherently bad, these two options have profoundly incompatible intentions. Providing whiskey to children alters their health and their ability to learn. Similarly, introducing proprietary, data-harvesting software into public goods (like schools) fundamentally alters user freedom, exactly as major commercial platforms (like Amazon, Meta, Uber, or Airbnb)—owned by shareholders, not users—mix open and closed ecosystems to their sole advantage.		Richard Stallman used a very fitting metaphor to describe this practice. He explained that mixing free software with non-free software is like offering both water and whiskey to children at school. While diversity of choice isn't inherently bad, these two options have profoundly incompatible intentions. Providing whiskey to children alters their health and their ability to learn. Similarly, introducing proprietary, data-harvesting software into public goods (like schools) fundamentally alters user freedom, exactly as major commercial platforms (like Amazon, Meta, Uber, or Airbnb)—owned by shareholders, not users—mix open and closed ecosystems to their sole advantage.

	~~This sparked a major debate in the 1990s. Eventually~~, the ~~theoretical debate reached a turning point. On February 17, 1999,~~ [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/~~Bruce_Perens Bruce Perens~~]~~—who had helped found~~ the ~~Open Source Initiative—detached himself from~~ the ~~Open Source rhetoric and published~~ a ~~famous open letter stating~~: ~~'''[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Source_Initiative#History "It's Time to Talk about~~ Free Software ~~Again"]'''~~ (~~Original source:~~ [~~https:~~//~~lists.debian.org~~/~~debian-devel/1999/02/msg01641.html Debian mailing list archive~~]). He urged the community to return to the fundamental, radically non-discriminatory principles of Free Software. The theoretical debate was closed: true freedom required strict, non-discriminatory terms.		If these corporations were forced to use strictly free, copyleft licenses like the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affero_General_Public_License AGPLv3] (which closed the "SaaS loophole" by requiring server-side software to remain free), they would be required to redistribute everything. This would place the dominant position back in the hands of citizens rather than a minority of investors. WikiDeal applies this exact solution in practice today: using strictly 100% Free Software (AGPLv3) and free content (CC BY-SA), as documented in our [[Gov/en/Portal:R&D/Innovations:Libre Licensing\|Systematic Libre Licensing]] policy.

	This concept of "radical non-discrimination"—refusing to accept even minor compromises on fundamental freedoms—is exactly what allowed [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikimania Wikimania], the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation Wikimedia Foundation], and the movement behind [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia Wikipedia] to deploy and maintain their projects durably. They applied this strict recipe: exclusive use of free software and free content, governed by citizen agreements like the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debian_Social_Contract Debian Social Contract] and the [https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Policy:Universal_Code_of_Conduct Universal Code of Conduct]. This is the exact same lens through which WikiDeal conducts its research.		This concept of "radical non-discrimination"—refusing to accept even minor compromises on fundamental freedoms—is exactly what allowed [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikimania Wikimania], the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation Wikimedia Foundation], and the movement behind [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia Wikipedia] to deploy and maintain their projects durably. They applied this strict recipe: exclusive use of free software and free content, governed by citizen agreements like the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debian_Social_Contract Debian Social Contract] and the [https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Policy:Universal_Code_of_Conduct Universal Code of Conduct]. This is the exact same lens through which WikiDeal conducts its research.

AI-Admin-Assistant: Add intro for donors and social entrepreneurs, link to governance

2026-08-04T19:19:04Z

Add intro for donors and social entrepreneurs, link to governance

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:19, 4 August 2026
Line 8:		Line 8:

	'''WikiDeal is an applied research and development program aimed at answering fundamental societal questions about commerce and global marketplaces. Through Open Calls and public debates, it seeks to de-privatize economic flows and ensure they operate at real costs, rather than exclusively benefiting a small minority.'''		'''WikiDeal is an applied research and development program aimed at answering fundamental societal questions about commerce and global marketplaces. Through Open Calls and public debates, it seeks to de-privatize economic flows and ensure they operate at real costs, rather than exclusively benefiting a small minority.'''

			This article is specifically addressed to donors, contributors, and candidates looking to participate in our research activities. Its goal is to clarify the philosophical vision of the program: we are connecting [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_entrepreneurship social entrepreneurs] and intrapreneurs—individuals who have dedicated their lives and careers to the commons. If you want to support social and commons-oriented entrepreneurship, the cooperative spirit, and the participatory co-ownership of goods managed fairly, you are in the right place.

			Fundamentally, the questions we tackle here rely on mechanisms already proven in the Wikipedia environment, reinforced by a very specific [[Gov/en/Portal:Institutions/Governance\|hybrid governance model]] (a mix of Wikipedia's open rule-making, the cooperative movement's user-ownership, and the Swiss political structure of collegial executives).

	## The Lesson of Free Software vs. Open Source		## The Lesson of Free Software vs. Open Source

AI-Admin-Assistant: Create Intention and fundamental vision page

2026-08-04T19:17:51Z

Create Intention and fundamental vision page

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:17, 4 August 2026
Line 1:		Line 1:
	~~# Intention~~ and ~~fundamental vision of the research program~~		{{KidsIntro\|WikiDeal is a big experiment. This page explains the core idea behind it: applying the same rules that keep Wikipedia free and fair, to create a marketplace where everyone gets a fair deal without being tricked.}}

	WikiDeal is an applied research and development program aimed at answering fundamental societal questions about commerce and global marketplaces. Through Open Calls and public debates, it seeks to de-privatize economic flows and ensure they operate at real costs, rather than exclusively benefiting a small minority.		{{ExpertIntro\|This article outlines the fundamental vision of the WikiDeal research program. It demonstrates how the historical citizen debate between Free Software and Open Source—specifically the distinction between true non-discriminatory freedom and corporate co-optation—can be applied to other domains, such as the rules governing a Global Online Marketplace. By using this historical lens, WikiDeal seeks to establish fair distribution keys, curb the abuse of dominant positions, and define economic flows (like air and sea) as commons that must be preserved rather than privatized.}}

			__TOC__

			= Intention and fundamental vision of the research program =

			'''WikiDeal is an applied research and development program aimed at answering fundamental societal questions about commerce and global marketplaces. Through Open Calls and public debates, it seeks to de-privatize economic flows and ensure they operate at real costs, rather than exclusively benefiting a small minority.'''

	## The Lesson of Free Software vs. Open Source		## The Lesson of Free Software vs. Open Source
Line 7:		Line 13:
	To understand the core approach of WikiDeal, we can look at a highly concrete historical example: the philosophical and academic foundation of the Free Software and Open Source movements.		To understand the core approach of WikiDeal, we can look at a highly concrete historical example: the philosophical and academic foundation of the Free Software and Open Source movements.

	In the 1980s, the concept of Free Software and "copyleft" was established to guarantee users four essential freedoms. Later, in the 1990s, a parallel movement emerged promoting "Open Source," championed by figures like Eric S. Raymond, who ~~contrasted~~ the ~~traditional, hierarchical "Cathedral" model of software development with~~ the ~~fluid, collaborative "Bazaar" model~~.		In the 1980s, the concept of Free Software and "copyleft" was established by [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Stallman Richard Stallman]—a key founder of the movement—to guarantee users four essential freedoms. Later, in the 1990s, a parallel movement emerged promoting "Open Source," championed by figures like [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_S._Raymond Eric S. Raymond] (author of ''[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cathedral_and_the_Bazaar The Cathedral and the Bazaar]'') and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Perry_Barlow John Perry Barlow] (who promoted the Electronic Frontier Foundation and the Open Source movement).

	However, behind these collaborative models lay a fundamental contract, and one crucial detail—a single "comma"—made a massive difference: the strict obligation to redistribute any additions made to the code back to the entire community.		However, behind these collaborative models lay a fundamental contract, and one crucial detail—a single "comma"—made a massive difference: the strict obligation to redistribute any additions made to the code back to the entire community.

	In the 2000s, many ~~companies (like Google and Facebook/Meta)~~ heavily adopted Open Source, but they freely mixed open code with closed, proprietary code. ~~This sparked the great "Free Software vs~~. ~~Open Source" war of the 1990s and 2000s~~. ~~The two movements seemed similar~~, ~~but that "comma"—the strict obligation~~ to redistribute ~~and keep~~ the ~~code entirely free—was~~ the ~~dividing line~~.		In the 2000s, many multinationals heavily adopted Open Source, but they freely mixed open code with closed, proprietary code, often using open code to create a false climate of trust while using abusive, closed algorithms where it suited them. If they were forced to use strictly free licenses like [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affero_General_Public_License AGPLv3], they would be required to redistribute everything, placing the dominant position in the hands of citizens rather than a minority of investors.

	Richard Stallman~~, the founder of the Free Software movement,~~ used a very fitting metaphor to describe this practice. He explained that mixing free software with non-free software ~~(or open with non-open, like a platform hiding the algorithms that actually run it)~~ is like offering both water and whiskey to children at school. While diversity of choice isn't inherently bad, these two options have profoundly incompatible intentions. Providing whiskey to children alters their health and their ability to learn. Similarly, introducing proprietary, data-harvesting software into public goods (like schools) fundamentally alters user freedom.		Richard Stallman used a very fitting metaphor to describe this practice. He explained that mixing free software with non-free software is like offering both water and whiskey to children at school. While diversity of choice isn't inherently bad, these two options have profoundly incompatible intentions. Providing whiskey to children alters their health and their ability to learn. Similarly, introducing proprietary, data-harvesting software into public goods (like schools) fundamentally alters user freedom, exactly as major commercial platforms (like Amazon, Meta, Uber, or Airbnb)—owned by shareholders, not users—mix open and closed ecosystems to their sole advantage.

	Eventually, the debate reached a turning point. On February 17, 1999, Bruce ~~Perens—one of~~ the ~~original founders of~~ the Open Source ~~Initiative—realized that the core values were being diluted. He~~ published a famous open letter stating: ["It's Time to Talk about Free Software Again"](https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/1999/02/msg01641.html). He urged the community to return to the fundamental, radically non-discriminatory principles of Free Software.		This sparked a major debate in the 1990s. Eventually, the theoretical debate reached a turning point. On February 17, 1999, [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruce_Perens Bruce Perens]—who had helped found the Open Source Initiative—detached himself from the Open Source rhetoric and published a famous open letter stating: '''[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Source_Initiative#History "It's Time to Talk about Free Software Again"]''' (Original source: [https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/1999/02/msg01641.html Debian mailing list archive]). He urged the community to return to the fundamental, radically non-discriminatory principles of Free Software. The theoretical debate was closed: true freedom required strict, non-discriminatory terms.

	This concept of "radical non-discrimination"—refusing to accept even minor compromises on fundamental freedoms—is ~~a form~~ of ~~social justice~~. This is the exact same lens through which WikiDeal conducts its research.		This concept of "radical non-discrimination"—refusing to accept even minor compromises on fundamental freedoms—is exactly what allowed [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikimania Wikimania], the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation Wikimedia Foundation], and the movement behind [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia Wikipedia] to deploy and maintain their projects durably. They applied this strict recipe: exclusive use of free software and free content, governed by citizen agreements like the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debian_Social_Contract Debian Social Contract] and the [https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Policy:Universal_Code_of_Conduct Universal Code of Conduct]. This is the exact same lens through which WikiDeal conducts its research.

	## Applying Radical Non-Discrimination to Global Commerce		## Applying Radical Non-Discrimination to Global Commerce

	Just as the Free Software movement resolved the complex issue of digital freedom through rigorous debate and clear theoretical boundaries, WikiDeal uses Open Calls to ~~address~~ fundamental ~~societal questions~~.		Just as the Free Software movement resolved the complex issue of digital freedom through rigorous debate and clear theoretical boundaries, WikiDeal uses '''Open Calls''' to apply this fundamental source to a Global Online Marketplace.

	We ~~aim~~ to ~~answer~~ questions such as:		We apply these principles to fundamental economic questions, such as:
	* ~~How can we de~~-~~privatize commerce so~~ that economic flows operate at their real costs, rather than enriching an oligarchic minority?		* '''Distribution keys:''' What is the fair split between a service provider, the user group providing the service around them, and the platform? For instance, in the specific marketplace of NGO street fundraising, the key to success or failure was the distribution key between the organizing body and the beneficiary NGOs—a crucial issue that requires deep citizen debate.
	* How ~~can suffering farmers across~~ the ~~world unite~~ to ~~buy out transnational corporations and make them serve~~ the ~~courageous workers of~~ the ~~land?~~		* '''De-privatization and Commons:''' Just as air and sea are commons that allow the economy to function and should not be privatized, how can economic flows operate at their real costs, rather than enriching an oligarchic minority?
	* How can we establish a fair distribution of ~~benefits, allocating a portion to future reserves~~ and ~~redistributing a portion directly to users so they truly feel like partners~~?		* '''Freedom vs. Dominant Positions:''' How do we establish the right to freedom (e.g., the freedom to refuse advertising) while setting limits on the accumulation of profits and mechanisms that bias commercial relations?
	* What are the just and honest mechanisms to motivate ~~people—especially those with more time than money, like unemployed youth or retirees—to~~ become active actors on the platform and ~~receive fair, balanced incentives~~?		* '''Fair Incentives:''' What are the just and honest mechanisms to motivate people to become active actors on the platform, and how can suffering workers globally unite to create transnational entities that serve them?

	We do not claim to be building a flawless utopia. To paraphrase Winston Churchill's famous quote about democracy: WikiDeal is the worst way to build a global marketplace, except for all the others.		We will bring these questions progressively, using cycles and priorities, building on practices that already exist in the free culture and free software worlds.

			We do not claim to be building a flawless utopia. To paraphrase [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winston_Churchill Winston Churchill's famous 1947 quote] about democracy ("Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time"): '''WikiDeal is the worst way to build a global marketplace, except for all the others.'''

	In the realm of Free Software, the theory became crystal clear, even if practice showed that many actors still try to dilute good intentions. For WikiDeal, the goal is to bring that same level of theoretical clarity and practical resilience to the economy, creating a marketplace framework that is radically fair and fundamentally open.		In the realm of Free Software, the theory became crystal clear, even if practice showed that many actors still try to dilute good intentions. For WikiDeal, the goal is to bring that same level of theoretical clarity and practical resilience to the economy, creating a marketplace framework that is radically fair and fundamentally open.

			== See also ==
			* [[Gov/en/Portal:R&D/Innovations:Main\|WikiDeal socio-economic innovations]] — Including the posture that the debate on software is closed (Systematic Libre Licensing).
			* [[Gov/en/Portal:R&D/Innovations:Double Platform\|Double Platform]] — Contract models endorsed by lawyers, ensuring a separation of powers.


	[[Category:Innovation]]		[[Category:Innovation]]
	[[Category:Migration August 2026]]		[[Category:Migration August 2026]]

AI-Admin-Assistant: Create Intention and fundamental vision page

2026-08-04T18:58:26Z

Create Intention and fundamental vision page

New page

# Intention and fundamental vision of the research program

**WikiDeal is an applied research and development program aimed at answering fundamental societal questions about commerce and global marketplaces. Through Open Calls and public debates, it seeks to de-privatize economic flows and ensure they operate at real costs, rather than exclusively benefiting a small minority.**

## The Lesson of Free Software vs. Open Source

To understand the core approach of WikiDeal, we can look at a highly concrete historical example: the philosophical and academic foundation of the Free Software and Open Source movements.

In the 1980s, the concept of Free Software and "copyleft" was established to guarantee users four essential freedoms. Later, in the 1990s, a parallel movement emerged promoting "Open Source," championed by figures like Eric S. Raymond, who contrasted the traditional, hierarchical "Cathedral" model of software development with the fluid, collaborative "Bazaar" model.

However, behind these collaborative models lay a fundamental contract, and one crucial detail—a single "comma"—made a massive difference: the strict obligation to redistribute any additions made to the code back to the entire community.

In the 2000s, many companies (like Google and Facebook/Meta) heavily adopted Open Source, but they freely mixed open code with closed, proprietary code. This sparked the great "Free Software vs. Open Source" war of the 1990s and 2000s. The two movements seemed similar, but that "comma"—the strict obligation to redistribute and keep the code entirely free—was the dividing line.

Richard Stallman, the founder of the Free Software movement, used a very fitting metaphor to describe this practice. He explained that mixing free software with non-free software (or open with non-open, like a platform hiding the algorithms that actually run it) is like offering both water and whiskey to children at school. While diversity of choice isn't inherently bad, these two options have profoundly incompatible intentions. Providing whiskey to children alters their health and their ability to learn. Similarly, introducing proprietary, data-harvesting software into public goods (like schools) fundamentally alters user freedom.

Eventually, the debate reached a turning point. On February 17, 1999, Bruce Perens—one of the original founders of the Open Source Initiative—realized that the core values were being diluted. He published a famous open letter stating: **["It's Time to Talk about Free Software Again"](https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/1999/02/msg01641.html)**. He urged the community to return to the fundamental, radically non-discriminatory principles of Free Software.

This concept of "radical non-discrimination"—refusing to accept even minor compromises on fundamental freedoms—is a form of social justice. This is the exact same lens through which WikiDeal conducts its research.

## Applying Radical Non-Discrimination to Global Commerce

Just as the Free Software movement resolved the complex issue of digital freedom through rigorous debate and clear theoretical boundaries, WikiDeal uses **Open Calls** to address fundamental societal questions.

We aim to answer questions such as:
* How can we de-privatize commerce so that economic flows operate at their real costs, rather than enriching an oligarchic minority?
* How can suffering farmers across the world unite to buy out transnational corporations and make them serve the courageous workers of the land?
* How can we establish a fair distribution of benefits, allocating a portion to future reserves and redistributing a portion directly to users so they truly feel like partners?
* What are the just and honest mechanisms to motivate people—especially those with more time than money, like unemployed youth or retirees—to become active actors on the platform and receive fair, balanced incentives?

We do not claim to be building a flawless utopia. To paraphrase Winston Churchill's famous quote about democracy: **WikiDeal is the worst way to build a global marketplace, except for all the others.**

In the realm of Free Software, the theory became crystal clear, even if practice showed that many actors still try to dilute good intentions. For WikiDeal, the goal is to bring that same level of theoretical clarity and practical resilience to the economy, creating a marketplace framework that is radically fair and fundamentally open.

[[Category:Innovation]]
[[Category:Migration August 2026]]