Gov/en/Portal:R&D/Open-Calls:Main

💡 In simple words: An open call is an invitation that says 'come help us!' to anyone with good ideas. This page explains how people can join in and build WikiDeal together.

🎯 In 20 seconds (scientific summary): Open calls are organised in waves, each with global platform calls and marketplace calls. Wave 1 gathers four early-bird calls (URL structure, graphic charter, funding ecosystem, plus a marketplace tutorial), offering cash plus Rewards (no guarantee*). Wave 2 gathers draft calls still under discussion. Evaluation combines a public vote with an expert panel; AI transparency disclosure is mandatory.

💬 Submit a proposal: open to all. No email needed: just log in, then post your ideas and links in the Discussion tab of each individual call (open the call page in the tables below, then use its Discussion tab), not the Discussion tab of this general page. You can then raise a Request for Comments (RFC) to draw attention to your proposal and get community comments.

On this page:

• Gift Economy and Participation
• Open Call Governance and Lifecycle
• Open call waves
• Open Call at a Glance
• What Can Be Proposed
• Evaluation and Rewards
• Maturity Score & Open Call Allocation
• State of the art

Gift Economy and Participation

Given the early culture of Wikipedia, the online participatory culture, and the importance of the Gift Economy, unpaid contributions are highly encouraged. Participants often contribute for the recognition and the pleasure of seeing a project deploy relevantly and with consensus. Financial rewards or Karma tokens are designed merely to "boost" or stimulate the process so it goes faster; they are not an absolute rule. In fact, some open calls may distribute no money at all. The primary driver remains the gift to the common good.

Open Call Governance and Lifecycle

To ensure transparency, prevent conflicts of interest, and avoid insider advantages, every Open Call follows a strict governance structure and lifecycle, inspired by Wikimedia practices and adapted for WikiDeal's environment. Complaints or disputes are resolved via simplified arbitration to guarantee gentle and fair exchanges.

Key Roles

• Steering Committee: The central committee that oversees the overall Open Call ecosystem. It is responsible for nominating the Facilitator from an emerging pool of high-level experts. It must approve handovers of the Chairperson role.
• Chairperson: Gathers the state of the art and formalizes the initial hypothesis with peers. Submits the preliminary versions to the scientific council and steering committee before any funds are distributed. Note that co-chairing is possible, and the role of Chairperson can be handed over (transmission of chairing) during the lifecycle. This is because analyzing proposals scientifically and accompanying their practical implementation are different roles, and some Chairs might be mandated specifically to accompany the implementation phase.
• Facilitator: Acts as the executive secretariat. This is a highly skilled expert in forum discussion management who accompanies the call from A to Z: design, communication, managing comments and reviews, overseeing the reward attribution process, and monitoring the implementation of selected projects.
• Commission: Created specifically for each call (ranging from 3 to 9 members, following the Swiss executive model). It can include:
  • Public participants answering a public call to evaluate.
  • Mandated and paid experts.
  • Volunteers who give up their right to be paid (choosing to focus on evaluating for the beauty of the gesture rather than participating in the contest).
  • Note on transformation: A Commission can later transform into a User Group. For example, a commission studying arbitration might eventually animate and become the User Group managing global and local arbitration chambers.
  • Note on transformation: A Commission can later transform into a User Group. For example, a commission studying arbitration might eventually animate and become the User Group managing global and local arbitration chambers.

Lifecycle and Phases

1. Design of the Call: Formalizing the scope and identifying the state of the art (led by the Chairperson).
2. Nomination & Commission Formation: The Chairperson is appointed, and a list of invited guests/evaluators is presented to the Steering Committee. The Commission is formed (mix of public, paid, and volunteer members).
3. Evaluation: The Commission evaluates the submitted proposals.
4. Initial Reward Attribution: Usually, 50% of the promised sum is awarded immediately upon selection.
5. Implementation Support: The Facilitator and the Commission assist the winner(s) in implementing the project (e.g., software development, video production, recruitment campaigns). Members of the Commission can volunteer to participate in evaluating these concrete results.
6. Final Evaluation & Remaining Attribution: Depending on the specific call, the remaining 50% is awarded 1 to 3 years later, contingent on how well the idea is implemented and sustained.
7. Operations & Standby: After the final evaluation, the idea enters the operational phase (with regular follow-ups). The Chairperson and the Commission are not dissolved: they go on standby. Just like Wikipedia articles remain open for debate, these experts serve as guardians of the concept. They can be reactivated years later to study new ideas or significant changes. The Chairperson role can be handed over to a successor if both the Commission and Steering Committee agree.

Open call waves

Open calls are organised in waves, and each wave has two parts: the calls that concern WikiDeal as a global platform (structure, identity, management), and the calls that concern specific marketplaces. Wave 1 gathers the four early bird calls, the pilot experience calls, also called open calls for pioneers: they are launched before the steering committee is formed, and they are especially open to Wiki experts (experts in Wiki design and use). Their informal launch is planned for 21 July 2026, the opening day of Wikimania 2026 in Paris, which celebrates the 25th anniversary of Wikipedia. Wave 2 gathers draft calls that are still under discussion: they are listed below, and the list itself is intended to evolve.

Wave 1: the pilot experience calls (early bird)

Wave 1, WikiDeal global

Open call	Wave	Status	Deadline	Rewards
URL naming and general structure	1	Launched	No deadline: open until a first simple version has been adopted	CHF 1,000 in direct cash + CHF 10,000 in Rewards (no guarantee*)
Graphic charter	1	Launched	No deadline: open until a first simple version has been adopted	CHF 1,000 in direct cash + CHF 10,000 in Rewards (no guarantee*)
Funding ecosystem development (software developers)	1	Launched	None announced: open until a provider is selected and mandated	US$ 1,000 in direct cash + 30,000 in Rewards (no guarantee*), indicative, for about 100 hours

Wave 1, specific marketplaces

Open call	Wave	Status	Deadline	Rewards
Spectacular tutorial on small loans between family, friends and neighbours	1	Launched	21 December 2026 (competitive: a single proposal is selected)	CHF 1,000 in direct cash + CHF 10,000 in Rewards (no guarantee*)

Small loans between close people have already been initiated on WikiDeal with a first contract model: see the small loans contract base (the amount loaned between the two parties and the repayment deadline), within the Small Loans portal.

Wave 2: still under discussion

Wave 2 calls are drafts under construction. They have not been launched yet. We have moved the full list of these draft calls to a dedicated page so they don't mix with active calls.

👉 See the full list of Open Calls currently under study

If you want to respond to a call, go to the discussion page of that call and post your proposal there.

The philosophy of Specific Marketplace calls

While some calls improve the global WikiDeal platform, Specific Marketplaces calls aim to solve precise research questions that fluidify, unblock, and improve a given market.

• Example 1 (Transport): How do we handle recurring rides? If a driver takes a user to the hospital once, and they agree on a weekly ride, the platform fee for those recurring rides must drop significantly. Otherwise, they will bypass the platform, breaking the trust loop. A call could ask: What defines a recurring ride? What is the lower fee percentage? Does it decrease progressively? What are the compensation, control, and debate measures if rules are broken? This is a typical research question meant to unblock a market.
• Example 2 (Small Loans): The current Spectacular tutorial on small loans call addresses a concrete need: resolving the loss of trust within families. The video acts as an "unblocker". The intention is to create a climate where people aren't tricked when lending without a guarantee, and aren't afraid to lend, thus reducing mistrust and risks. The conceptual element is the key; the practical implementation (the video itself) follows naturally.

The spirit of these calls

For the philosophical context and fundamental vision behind these open calls, see the Intention and Vision of the research program.

These early bird calls are structured a bit like the open calls of European research and innovation programmes, but in a softer, lighter and less administrative way. There is no consortium to build and no heavy paperwork: they are micro calls for ideas, open to anyone who brings relevant and useful ideas to the cause.

The steering committee intends to meet periodically, review all the ideas posted, and attribute the rewards. For each call, the rewards are intended to be distributed across several people: contributors who bring complementary ideas, who comment on the proposals of others, and who help each other. The calls are not a cold competition where one person wins and the others lose. The goal is to have several winners, because they helped each other.

Open call rules and procedures in brief

This is a summary: the detailed rules and procedures are gathered in the Open Call FAQ.

• Open Call Commissions: Each call is managed by a dedicated commission composed of a Chair, a Facilitator, and a group of Evaluators (usually 3 to 5 people). They evaluate proposals, justify decisions (seeking consensus), and conduct a follow-up one year later to distribute the second half of the funds based on the idea's actual implementation. See the Open Call Commissions page for details on their composition and roles.
• The Ynternet.org Foundation and the WikiDeal founder (see credits) are committed to making the announced sums available only if the proposed added values are judged good. If no contribution is judged good enough, the money is never kept: it is intended to be reinvested in another open call.
• Attribution is intended to happen progressively, as good contributions arrive, with explanations for each attribution.
• When money is attributed and paid, it is the WikiDeal team that informs the contributors concerned.
• Part of the sum, up to half (for example CHF 500 out of CHF 1,000), can be withheld for up to one year, in order to verify that the ideas last: this is the maturity criterion. If the ideas have lasted, the second half is intended to be paid to the person who brought the main ideas, as an increase of the donation.
• What matters is to distinguish a solid base from a flash in the pan.
• Not every call is monetised. Some calls may start with no money distribution at all: only Rewards (no guarantee*), or even no reward of any kind. Contributing without claiming any reward is always possible: the reward is one possible motivation among others, never an exclusive one. What matters is to make a project live together, to let a community emerge, and to answer societal challenges linked to the founding research question, "Can users own, run and sustain a global marketplace?".

Open Call at a Glance

Evaluation	Periodic (cycle dates not yet defined)
Rewards	Direct cash and Rewards (no guarantee*)
Karma token rewards	Karma tokens, usable for services in the ecosystem
Proposal types	Improvement · Substitution
Jury	Public vote + expert panel
Disclosure	AI transparency mandatory

The Open Call is WikiDeal's continuous invitation to the community, and to the world, to propose improvements to or alternatives to the current model. Ideas may be submitted at any time; they are evaluated periodically. The dates of the evaluation cycles are not yet defined: one of the options under consideration is a quarterly rhythm, possibly aligned with the seasons. No first evaluation date is announced for now.

What Can Be Proposed

Note: You can also propose entirely new open calls. See Propose an Open Call.

Open Call proposals fall into two categories. Improvement proposals take the current Prototype 1 model as a given and propose enhancements: a better formula for distributing Rewards (no guarantee*), a new mechanism for onboarding User Groups, an improved arbitration process. Substitution proposals challenge one or more elements of Prototype 1 and propose replacements: an alternative bonding curve formula, a different governance structure, a new approach to Commission calculation. Proposals that entirely abandon the WikiDeal model are out of scope; the Open Calls are about improving and diversifying, not about starting over.

Theory vs. Practice: Concept and Implementation

In both Improvement and Substitution proposals, it is crucial to distinguish between the theory (answering "how to do it?") and the practice (operationalizing the idea into a functional result).

• A proposal can bring just the theory, just the practice, or both.
• Example 1 (Software): The person formalizing an algorithm (theory) and the developer writing the code (practice) might be two different people. They can submit a joint proposal or help each other across different proposals.
• Example 2 (Design): The same person might propose a logo concept (theory) and also deliver its variations: black and white, with or without a slogan (practice).

The ultimate goal of Open Calls is to stimulate the transformation of ideas into realistic, implementable results. Ideas are fully recognized when they are not only brilliant but also realizable within acceptable constraints of time, budget, and skills.

During the evaluation, the Commission assesses the degree of completeness (degré de finitude) of a proposal. Is it fully mature, or does it need further refinement? Participants can work alone, form groups, or combine their strengths (e.g., one group brings an unfinished idea, another brings the skills to finalize and implement it) and share the reward. Depending on the call, the expectations may range from a simple concept to a fully operational deployment, covering all or part of the typical CDIEM cycle (Conception, Design, Implementation, Evaluation, Maintenance).

A valid proposal must specify: the exact change proposed; the costs of implementing it; the expected benefits and the evidence base for those expectations; compatibility with the membership-based entry system (memberships must remain in all proposals); the proposer's own capacity to contribute to implementation; and the full AI transparency disclosure if any AI tools were used. Proposals lacking these elements are returned for completion before formal evaluation.

Evaluation and Rewards

Each periodic evaluation combines a public vote (accessible to all WikiDeal membership holders) with a structured expert panel review. The expert panel includes platform cooperative specialists, legal scholars, economists familiar with commons governance, and at least one representative from the Living Labs research community. The panel's role is not to override the public vote but to ensure that winning proposals are technically feasible and legally compliant.

Rewards can combine several complementary forms: direct cash payments, Rewards (no guarantee*), which represent a conditional claim on future subscription revenue, and Karma tokens, which can be exchanged for services within the WikiDeal ecosystem. See Rewards for the full picture. For each call, a specific prize is attributed depending on the available funds, the importance, the urgency, and the complexity of the challenge. There may be multiple winners in a cycle, a main prize and a complementary prize, to recognise proposals that work well together. The Open Calls are designed to remain genuinely community-driven, with evaluation guided by public vote and independent expert review.

Maturity Score & Open Call Allocation

Maturity Scores are specifically designed to evaluate the communities managing the different topics, known as User Groups. Open Call resources are allocated based on these scores: the higher a User Group's Maturity Score, the fewer Open Call resources it receives, because mature communities are largely self-sustaining. Conversely, early-stage groups receive maximum Open Call attention and rewards to help them grow.

Commissions as Incubators for User Groups

In the WikiDeal ecosystem, Open Calls and their Commissions often act as incubators (or "antichambres") for potential future User Groups. The lifecycle naturally flows from a temporary call to a permanent community:

1. Incubation: A subject begins with an Open Call, incubating a first concept.
2. First Maturity: The resulting hypothesis is tested and reaches a first level of maturity.
3. Updates & Commits: The community suggests improvements and updates based on the initial results.
4. Transformation: As the subject requires ongoing attention, autonomy, and regular voting on updates (commits), the human Commission progressively transforms into an autonomous User Group (which may or may not adopt a formal legal structure).

Not all Open Calls become User Groups. For example, a Commission tasked with designing a logo might see very little activity once the logo is adopted. It would not need to become an active User Group. Conversely, a Commission establishing the rules for a complex marketplace (like transportation or babysitting) will face ongoing important questions, regular updates, and require partial autonomy. These are the commissions that mature into strong User Groups.

Maturity scores are reviewed quarterly by the Living Lab team and displayed in each User Group's infobox.

📊 Full methodology: User Group Maturity Assessment: the 7 indicators, composite scoring, and allocation table. See also Maturity Score (innovation page).

State of the art

Open Calls apply a well-documented family of methods: open innovation, crowdsourcing and user-driven innovation. The works below are the reference literature that inspires this mechanism.

• Henry Chesbrough (2003), Open Innovation: The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Technology, Harvard Business School Press: open innovation on Wikipedia · Henry Chesbrough.
• Jeff Howe (2006), The Rise of Crowdsourcing, Wired, 14(6): original article · crowdsourcing on Wikipedia.
• Eric von Hippel (2005), Democratizing Innovation, MIT Press: doi:10.7551/mitpress/2333.001.0001 · free full text · author page on Wikipedia.
• James Surowiecki (2004), The Wisdom of Crowds, Doubleday: book page on Wikipedia.
• Kevin J. Boudreau and Karim R. Lakhani (2013), Using the Crowd as an Innovation Partner, Harvard Business Review, 91(4): article page.

See also: Open Call FAQ · Prototype 1 Deliverables · Deliverables · User Group Maturity Assessment · All innovations · Governance