Creating list of Architects

[Ethernian]

… discussion imported from Council of Prague Agenda: REA gathering

@fubuloubu

I would like to be in short list of skilled architects available for work in corporate projects.

That’s a bit political, and I would argue unnecessary.

If you are doing the job of an architect correctly, your reputation proceeds you and I think any consulting work you wish to do would come naturally. I don’t think we need an actual list or endorsement to be successful.

Otherwise, it all sounds good to me

@fubuloubu

Well, the list is still a distraction from the real work an architect can do, which is bring projects together and build foundations for successful projects.

The reality is you can claim to be in the REA. Anyone can. If someone is impressed with that and hires you, then so be it. If they are smart, they look into your history and see all the awesome things you’ve done, which hopefully speaks about your legitimacy. A list will not do that, at least not without major editing. A list of people’s names by itself means nothing without their project history.

Why manage a list of everyone’s resumes, when everyone can just manage their own resumes?

@Ethernian

Well, the list is still a distraction from the real work an architect can do, which is bring projects together and build foundations for successful projects.

I would not see it so restrictive. The “real EA’s work” is not inside the Ethereum community only. They also act as an interface to corporate world, because that is what corps are looking for (read the post from @apitkevich). EAs help to adopt the technology by corps and collect requirements from them. It makes sense and win-win for all.

As I stated in Forming a Ring of EA post, the Architect role is aimed to be “financially self-sufficient” . Corps are ready to pay for the architect knowledge and it is how the EAs can earn some money. IMHO, it is important to give people a possibility to earn money with their skills.

The reality is you can claim to be in the REA. Anyone can. If someone is impressed with that and hires you,
…
Why manage a list of everyone’s resumes, when everyone can just manage their own resumes?

What you are describing is an example of some bad implementation. Let us find the better one.
What I have mentioned, there is a valid demand: сorps will find people, and people would like to be found.

Cooperation between REA and industry is important for both sides. I see the “List” as an interface between them.

@fubuloubu

a. Corps need to find people
b. People want to be found

So, we make a list. People want to be on the list because of a and b. Now there is incentivize to be on this list. Who manages the list? Well, if it is a person or group of people, they have direct control over discovery of these architects. If it is the entire REA, then the ring is no longer permissionless as we are gatekeeping. If there is no gatekeeper, then there is no list, it is just a participation badge (which is fine!)

You can get into something fancy with TCRs, but they haven’t really been proven widely in practice and it’s still a gatekeeper functionality at the end of the day, albeit a more incentive-aligned one. It is also a massive distraction, you are constantly worried about your position on the list as it directly affects your ability to get work. You could argue brand building is the same thing, but it makes the implicit explicit.

Good architects will be “ financially self-sufficient ” by being good architects. Participating in the REA and sharing your knowledge on how you can be most efficient and solve problems for corp clients is a sign of being a good Ethereum architect, because it’s a sign that you believe radical colloboration (not competition) gets work done faster and better. Your resume and the work you’ve done in the past fills in the rest of blanks.

A list either devolves meaninglessness (badges), or is a gatekeeping function that prevents others from realizing their own abilities and turns all of it into a competitive game instead of a cooperative one.

I don’t want to build REA as that system. You can feel free to, but I’d like to keep the ring permissionless and colloborative so we can all grow, do well, and help others.

@fubuloubu

I think that list bit sounds more argumentative than I meant it, but I believe colloboration and permissionlessness is a core strength of Ethereum.

If you want to talk about a reputation system, that is a different discussion I think

@apitkevich

I think the list is necessary and we can discuss on 29th the various approaches how it can be created and maintained.
Please look at it now just like a requirements for the interface - the list of architects should be available for those who is seeking. How the underlaying data is collected is a separate question. Representing a big consultancy I can confirm that it is my requirement to have a simple access to the list of recognized architects…
And, yes, I certainly will look into the details of how this list is created and how credible the people there. And obviously I’ll form my own opinion trust or not the information in the list based on the multiple factors including the feedback loop. But all these is still needs to be designed, implemented and tested…
And honestly despite the fact the list is an important component I was hoping to attract people who are not only interested to be placed in the list but also are interested to work on architecture materials.

[Ethernian]

@fubuloubu, @apitkevich
The term “List of best architects” is just a permissionless sorted List.
The list membership policy is easy. I would create only one restriction: anyone is free to join the list actively and by itself, but can not include other people. I would prevent blind and bulk invitations.

Key function is in the “sorting”, selecting “the bests” (whatever “the best” is).
Here we can start with some very simple criteria, like number of posts or number of likes on the posts - it is not really important where we start. We should start with just some idea of sorting. For sure we should keep it transparent and should not pretend to have an ultimate quality measure.

Because this initial quality criteria will not be sufficient, requesters (I mean here the corporations) will propose better quality parameters. They will propose some criteria they will trust. May be they will ask for number of projects done or they will create an assessments or hackathons. We just don’t know, but they are customers, they are free to create any rating criteria they can imagine.

All in all: anyone is free to join the list, any customer (corporation) is free to create his rating over the list or reuse an existing one.

[fubuloubu]

Ah, you are proposing a reputation system!

That’s a better foundation to build from in my opinion, at least from a permissionless standpoint. The real tough problem comes in defining the data source, and who processes the data. One could come up with all sorts of valid schemes and metrics to gauge a multi-dimensional viewpoint of an architect’s skillset and experience. Some of these would be subjective and others objective, like you mentioned. A good analysis would be very bespoke for a client, and probably very valuable! This plays along similar lines as the recruiting industry.

All of it requires a whole lot of data wrangling and analysis. It sounds like quite a project! And by the sounds of it, you have customers who would be willing to pay for this bespoke analysis. Why not start a company? Why does the REA need to do this?

Open data sets will naturally create markets for this kind of deep, subjective analysis.

[tjayrush]

Why does the REA need to do this?

Here, here.

[javimaravillas]

I’m in to be part of this list.

[Ethernian]

@javimaravillas

I’m in to be part of this list.

you are welcome to start here!

Please note we are running currently in some kind of “debug mode”: please write me if something is unclear or does not meet you expectations.