Idea: Collaborative Investing

Over the years, I’ve found social sites to the most engaging to interact with, but over time dynamics change, and what used to be a complex method is now a more simplistic design allowing a larger number of users to join. So sites like Facebook is a great way to connect and stay in touch with friends. However, it has always felt so minimal, and the ads/suggestions and spam/re-shares are becoming overwhelming.

However, Google has provided a more collaborative environment, and would like to continue to see that, but some of the recent updates have felt too simplified. As long as functionality & cooperative environment isn’t excluded, I’ll likely continue to use it for meetings and/or project documents. The problem I see, there is hardly any reward for posting relevant information, since most people like something funny or simple, and that got me thinking ‘how could we encourage intellectual pursuit?’

As a general median for people, the idea is far fetched, but as a freelancer and open source supporter. It got me thinking of another idea. Why not make money off of sites like GitHub where there is a demand to develop code?

Open Source Bounty Hunters

In essence, when there is a request to make a modification to the source code. The requester(s) can set an X amount for the ticket. The developer, or contributors, can then develop the code needed, submit it as a candidate, and gets a share in the candidate process.

The problem I see, you can code in different ways to achieve the same goal. Some better than others, and some quick and simple. Some an elegant piece of code, and others just to make a quick buck. With the amount of open possibilities, it is often possible to exploit various concepts.

However, a way to incorporate freelancing work into an open development community can have it’s advantage, and being able to both work and build a portfolio would help build a professional career.


  1. User’s who need a bug fixed or an enhancement added can set a bounty, which can stack up the more requests that are added.
  2. Developers & Designers can then browse and submit code.
    1. Code needs to be verified, and bounties can’t be withheld. A 2 week period.
    2. A vote up/down to chose which candidate to reward.
  3. Bounties would have a 3 month wait to be paid in full, which allows others to acquire the shares instead (which would extend the time to some degree).
    1. 50% is reserved for the final payout, but the other 50% is paid periodically over the 3 months.

Points to mention

  • Bounties would have to work off a point system allowing money to already be on the table.
    • Would original authors get any recognition or benefit based on the amount of overall code contributed?
    • Refunds: it’s bound to happen. Usually, bounties are final, but a grace period would be something to consider, even though it would be short. However, there could also be bounties that never get a claim.
    • Others may not agree with the primary candidate.
      • The amount of points could be used as a way to determine the amount of votes.  Those that don’t agree with the candidate can withhold at a 1:2 ratio.
  • The site would have to be 3rd party to sites like GitHub.
    • It may be possible to create forked versions to update code, and request merges. However, if the author doesn’t agree to merge the code, then the site will continue to use a forked version.
    • It may also be possible to use a browser extension to discover bounties within open source communities.
  • Publicity and encouraging engagement/cooperation.

So far, I’ve come across a few sites that do bounties or freelancing work, but the concepts are a bit what you would expect for being a bit short on expectations. Some of which are built on preexisting platforms. In the long run, it’ll either diminish, continue to succeed on functioning, or the concept is improved for a larger majority. It just doesn’t seem to get the publicity, but there’s still plenty of opportunity to improve on it.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *