Justice = Fair Access to Resources Based on Evidence of Contribution
Our shared economy framework ensures every contributor is recognized fairly and compensated justly. It's not just a payment system; it's a transparent, evidence-based valuation engine that treats all forms of contribution—code, documentation, community work—with equal respect. Contributors own their contribution value forever through immutable records.
| Category | Points |
|---|---|
| Lines of code | LOC × language weight (TS: 1.0, CSS: 0.3, Config: 0.1) |
| Complexity multiplier | Simple: 1x, Complex: 2.5x |
| New feature | 10 points × complexity |
| Bug fix | 5 points × severity (critical: 5x, minor: 1x) |
| Refactoring | 3 points × files affected |
| Test coverage | 2 points × coverage increase % |
| PRD/technical docs | 50 points × scope (feature: 1x, module: 3x, system: 10x) |
| Architecture decisions | 100 points (tracked in ADR) |
| Performance optimization | 20 points × % improvement |
| Code review | 5 points per substantive comment |
| Mentoring in review | 10 points if reviewer teaches |
| Catch critical bugs | 50 points per security/data loss bug |
Quality Multipliers: Tests pass first try (1.2x) · Zero review iterations (1.3x) · Includes tests (1.5x) · Includes docs (1.4x) · Zero regressions in 30 days (1.5x) · Max: 3.9x
| Category | Points |
|---|---|
| First response | 3 points (encourages newcomers) |
| Issue clarification | 5 points (reduces noise) |
| Issue resolution | 10 points × unblocked users |
| Duplicate detection | 2 points (saves maintainer time) |
| Tutorial written | 100 points × depth (quick: 1x, comprehensive: 5x) |
| API docs | 20 points × endpoints documented |
| Translation | 50 points × language + 0.5 points/key |
| Video/visual content | 150 points × length (quality-adjusted) |
| Onboarding contributors | 50 points per successful first PR |
| Forum/Discord support | 2 points per helpful response (upvote-weighted) |
| Public presentation | 200 points per talk/article |
| Community events | 100 points per event |
| Category | Points |
|---|---|
| Feature proposals (accepted) | 50 points |
| User research | 30 points × users interviewed |
| Competitive analysis | 40 points |
| Business model innovation | 100 points if implemented |
| Release coordination | 100 points per release |
| Dependency maintenance | 20 points × critical deps updated |
| Security audits | 200 points + 50 per vulnerability found |
| Category | Points |
|---|---|
| Blog posts | 20 points × reach (1k views = 1x) |
| Integration/plugin creation | 150 points × users |
| Educational content | 50 points × students reached |
| Case studies | 100 points |
| Mechanism | Rule |
|---|---|
| Sybil prevention | GitHub account > 6 months, verified email required |
| Velocity limits | Max 100 commits/day reviewed |
| Peer validation | Large contributions need 2+ maintainer reviews |
| Commit splitting | If 10+ commits could be 1, apply 0.5x multiplier |
| Code churn tax | Code deleted within 30 days = retroactive -50% points |
| Test quality | Tests that mock everything = 0 points |
| Collusion detection | 80%+ review overlap flagged for human review |
| Circular endorsement | A↔B mutual reviews = 0.7x multiplier |
| Feature | Description |
|---|---|
| Public ledger | Every contribution → permanent record with hash |
| Formula visibility | Point calculation in src/contribution-engine/formulas.ts |
| Monthly reports | Auto-generated contribution reports (Markdown + PDF) |
| Dispute process | Any contributor can challenge valuation via issue |
| Audit trail | Auto-generated breakdown in commit metadata |
| Historical changes | All formula changes tracked in git with rationale |
| Maintainer override | Requires 2/3 vote + public justification |
Based on 2024 research: $45 USD/hour minimum (COCOMO standard)
Contribution Value = (Base Points × Quality Multiplier × Impact Factor) / Effort Hours
If Contribution Value is below $45/hour → Adjusted Value = $45 × Effort Hours
| Effort Estimation | Method |
|---|---|
| Self-reported | Honor system + peer validation |
| Auto-detected | Commit timestamps via GitHub API |
| Code contributions | COCOMO II formula (industry-standard) |
| Outlier detection | 100 lines claimed as 20 hours → flagged |
| Protection | Description |
|---|---|
| Market rate adjustment | Quarterly review vs Upwork/Toptal rates |
| Cost-of-living index | High-COL contributors not penalized |
| Skill premium | Senior developers get 1.5-2x multiplier |
| Minimum wage alert | Earnings below local equivalent → alert |
| Profit redistribution | 40%+ margin while under $30/hr pay → redistribution |
| Satisfaction survey | Annual anonymous contributor review |
| Category | Points |
|---|---|
| UI/UX mockups | 100 points × screens designed |
| Design system | 500 points (one-time) + 50/component |
| User testing | 30 points × tests conducted |
| Accessibility audit | 200 points + 20/issue found |
| Moderation | 5 points/hour (emotionally taxing work) |
| Conflict resolution | 50 points per resolved dispute |
| Policy creation | 100 points (governance work) |
| Onboarding improvements | 40 points × % completion rate improvement |
| Category | Points |
|---|---|
| Meeting attendance | 10 points/hour (capped at 4 hours/week) |
| Email/DM support | 2 points per substantive response |
| Emotional support | Peer nomination = 50 bonus points monthly |
| Feature | Description |
|---|---|
| Public leaderboard | Top contributors (opt-in display) |
| Personal dashboard | Your points, rank, earnings projection |
| Team view | Organization total contributions |
| Historical trends | Contribution health metrics |
Bias Detection: Systematic tracking of undervalued contributor types · Quarterly gender/geography/seniority audit · Corrective retroactive adjustment + policy change
| Feature | Description |
|---|---|
| Permanent records | Contributions cannot be erased or devalued |
| Decentralized proof | Leadership changes don't affect contributor rights |
| Smart contracts | Automated profit distribution |
| Git timestamping | Commit → hash → Ethereum/Polygon (under $0.01/commit) |
| Contribution NFT | Major contributions = NFT with metadata |
| Portable reputation | Prove value across projects |
| Safeguard | Description |
|---|---|
| Voting cap | No contributor > 10% voting power |
| Power decay | Founding team voting power -10%/year |
| Emergency brake | 100+ objections pauses change for review |
| Arbitration | External mediator for major disputes (DAO-style) |
Bug fix in authentication flow (50 lines TypeScript)
| Calculation | Value |
|---|---|
| Base points | 50 lines × 1.0 (TS) × 1.5 (bug fix) = 75 |
| Quality multiplier | 1.2 (tests pass) × 1.5 (includes tests) = 1.8 |
| Impact factor | Critical bug = 5x |
| Total points | 75 × 1.8 × 5 = 675 |
| Effort | 4 hours |
| Raw value | $67.50 (675/10 rate) |
| Adjusted | $45/hour floor = $180 |
| First contribution bonus | 1.5x = $270 |
5 screens, user testing with 10 users, Figma documentation
| Calculation | Value |
|---|---|
| UI mockups | 100 × 5 screens = 500 |
| User testing | 30 × 10 users = 300 |
| Documentation | 20 |
| Total points | 820 |
| Effort | 16 hours |
| Hourly rate | $51.25 (above floor) |
Forum moderation, onboarded 3 contributors, organized 1 event
| Calculation | Value |
|---|---|
| Moderation | 5 pts/hr × 20 hours = 100 |
| Onboarding | 50 × 3 = 150 |
| Event | 100 |
| Discord support | 2 × 50 responses = 100 |
| Total points | 450 |
| Effort | ~25 hours |
| Adjusted | $45/hour = $1,125 |
| Question | Consideration |
|---|---|
| Time Decay | Should old contributions lose value over time? |
| Team Contributions | How to split points for pair programming? |
| Failed Experiments | Should exploratory work that doesn't ship earn points? |
| Competitive Dynamics | Does leaderboard create toxic vs. healthy motivation? |
| Global Equity | How to balance COL differences without geographic arbitrage? |
Build Request for Comments template for community input and transparent decision-making process.
Create contribution tracker using GitHub Actions + SQLite to start measuring and recording contributions.
Test formulas on existing GitHub history (6 months data) to validate fairness and identify edge cases.
Invite 5-10 early contributors to pilot program, gather feedback, and iterate on the system.
3-month iteration cycles based on real-world feedback and contribution patterns.
Public documentation of all decisions, formulas, and changes to build trust from day one.
| Pillar | Description |
|---|---|
| Evidence | Objective, measurable, auditable contribution data |
| Transparency | Public formulas, contestable outcomes |
| Dignity | No contributor earns below fair wage, all work is valued |
This framework ensures that every contributor is recognized fairly, compensated justly, and empowered to build together.
On This Page
Core PrinciplesContribution MatrixTechnical Contributions (40% weight)Community Contributions (30% weight)Strategic Contributions (20% weight)Ecosystem Contributions (10% weight)Anti-Gaming MechanismsDetection SystemsTransparency LayerValuation FormulaHourly Rate FloorUnderpayment PreventionDiverse Contribution RecognitionNon-Code ContributionsInvisible LaborSkill DevelopmentTransparency & AccountabilityContribution DashboardContestable ValuationsImmutable History (Blockchain)Formula Evolution & GovernanceDemocratic Formula UpdatesProtection Against CaptureExample CalculationsJunior Developer First ContributionDesigner Creates Onboarding FlowCommunity Manager Monthly WorkOpen QuestionsNext StepsJustice Pillars