pledge short-circuiting and akrasia-horizon-compatible pledge decaying

Akratics, wanted to run this proposal by you:
http://expost.padm.us/pledgesched

Very short version:

  • Pledge schedule is still $5 -> $10 -> $30 -> $90 -> $270 -> $810.
  • You can drop back a level at any time, with one-week’s notice.
  • You can jump forward at any time by just paying the current pledge.

I got the idea when talking to an economist about progressive
discipline – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_discipline
where the penalty eventually goes back down if you toe the line long
enough. My idea was to let the user be entirely in control of that,
subject to the akrasia horizon.

I also threw in a proposal for jumping ahead in the pledge schedule
without Beeminder forfeiting those smaller pledge amounts, which is
where we make all our money. We’ve intended to use subscriptions to
solve that problem but this is another way that’s easier to experiment
with.


http://dreev.es – search://"Daniel Reeves"
Follow the Yellow Brick Road – http://beeminder.com

Oh, I think that’s an excellent idea of letting it go back down eventually.
Makes the user feel less “used” and ultimately more in control of their
destinies, which is the whole objective, after all. And still allows
Beeminder to make money. And the choice to drop back or jump forward is
also excellent.

lm

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Daniel Reeves dreeves@beeminder.com
Date: Sun, Sep 9, 2012 at 1:46 PM
Subject: pledge short-circuiting and akrasia-horizon-compatible pledge
decaying
To: akratics akratics@googlegroups.com

Akratics, wanted to run this proposal by you:
http://expost.padm.us/pledgesched

Very short version:

  • Pledge schedule is still $5 -> $10 -> $30 -> $90 -> $270 -> $810.
  • You can drop back a level at any time, with one-week’s notice.
  • You can jump forward at any time by just paying the current pledge.

I got the idea when talking to an economist about progressive
discipline – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_discipline
where the penalty eventually goes back down if you toe the line long
enough. My idea was to let the user be entirely in control of that,
subject to the akrasia horizon.

I also threw in a proposal for jumping ahead in the pledge schedule
without Beeminder forfeiting those smaller pledge amounts, which is
where we make all our money. We’ve intended to use subscriptions to
solve that problem but this is another way that’s easier to experiment
with.


http://dreev.es – search://"Daniel Reeves"
Follow the Yellow Brick Road – http://beeminder.com

Love it! I know lots of folks who look at me aghast when I mention the
higher penalty levels. This will allow them to avoid those if they’re good,
and I think will be very good for Beeminder’s bottom line. :slight_smile:

Paul
On Sep 10, 2012 4:46 AM, “Daniel Reeves” dreeves@beeminder.com wrote:

Akratics, wanted to run this proposal by you:
Freebees and the Problem of Deleting Goals

Very short version:

  • Pledge schedule is still $5 → $10 → $30 → $90 → $270 → $810.
  • You can drop back a level at any time, with one-week’s notice.
  • You can jump forward at any time by just paying the current pledge.

I got the idea when talking to an economist about progressive
discipline – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_discipline
where the penalty eventually goes back down if you toe the line long
enough. My idea was to let the user be entirely in control of that,
subject to the akrasia horizon.

I also threw in a proposal for jumping ahead in the pledge schedule
without Beeminder forfeiting those smaller pledge amounts, which is
where we make all our money. We’ve intended to use subscriptions to
solve that problem but this is another way that’s easier to experiment
with.


http://dreev.es – search://“Daniel Reeves”
Follow the Yellow Brick Road – http://beeminder.com

it’s ironic how the smaller amounts people pledge the more beeminder makes :slight_smile:
though, amazingly, coughing up $90 pledges has been not entirely
uncommon lately.

paul, note that it’s already the case that you can choose to stay at
lower pledges. we strongly encourage you to go to the next higher
pledge level when you unfreeze but you don’t have to. once you do,
though, you can’t go back down. currently. this proposal would change
that.

On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 10:25 PM, Paul Fenwick paul.j.fenwick@gmail.com wrote:

Love it! I know lots of folks who look at me aghast when I mention the
higher penalty levels. This will allow them to avoid those if they’re good,
and I think will be very good for Beeminder’s bottom line. :slight_smile:

Paul

On Sep 10, 2012 4:46 AM, “Daniel Reeves” dreeves@beeminder.com wrote:

Akratics, wanted to run this proposal by you:
Freebees and the Problem of Deleting Goals

Very short version:

  • Pledge schedule is still $5 → $10 → $30 → $90 → $270 → $810.
  • You can drop back a level at any time, with one-week’s notice.
  • You can jump forward at any time by just paying the current pledge.

I got the idea when talking to an economist about progressive
discipline – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_discipline
where the penalty eventually goes back down if you toe the line long
enough. My idea was to let the user be entirely in control of that,
subject to the akrasia horizon.

I also threw in a proposal for jumping ahead in the pledge schedule
without Beeminder forfeiting those smaller pledge amounts, which is
where we make all our money. We’ve intended to use subscriptions to
solve that problem but this is another way that’s easier to experiment
with.


http://dreev.es – search://“Daniel Reeves”
Follow the Yellow Brick Road – http://beeminder.com


http://dreev.es – search://“Daniel Reeves”
Follow the Yellow Brick Road – http://beeminder.com

We’re about to publish a blog post about this, finally:
blog.beeminder.com/shortcircuit?secretpreview

On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 10:33 PM, Daniel Reeves dreeves@beeminder.com wrote:

it’s ironic how the smaller amounts people pledge the more beeminder makes :slight_smile:
though, amazingly, coughing up $90 pledges has been not entirely
uncommon lately.

paul, note that it’s already the case that you can choose to stay at
lower pledges. we strongly encourage you to go to the next higher
pledge level when you unfreeze but you don’t have to. once you do,
though, you can’t go back down. currently. this proposal would change
that.

On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 10:25 PM, Paul Fenwick paul.j.fenwick@gmail.com wrote:

Love it! I know lots of folks who look at me aghast when I mention the
higher penalty levels. This will allow them to avoid those if they’re good,
and I think will be very good for Beeminder’s bottom line. :slight_smile:

Paul

On Sep 10, 2012 4:46 AM, “Daniel Reeves” dreeves@beeminder.com wrote:

Akratics, wanted to run this proposal by you:
Freebees and the Problem of Deleting Goals

Very short version:

  • Pledge schedule is still $5 → $10 → $30 → $90 → $270 → $810.
  • You can drop back a level at any time, with one-week’s notice.
  • You can jump forward at any time by just paying the current pledge.

I got the idea when talking to an economist about progressive
discipline – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_discipline
where the penalty eventually goes back down if you toe the line long
enough. My idea was to let the user be entirely in control of that,
subject to the akrasia horizon.

I also threw in a proposal for jumping ahead in the pledge schedule
without Beeminder forfeiting those smaller pledge amounts, which is
where we make all our money. We’ve intended to use subscriptions to
solve that problem but this is another way that’s easier to experiment
with.


http://dreev.es – search://“Daniel Reeves”
Follow the Yellow Brick Road – http://beeminder.com


http://dreev.es – search://“Daniel Reeves”
Follow the Yellow Brick Road – http://beeminder.com


http://dreev.es – search://“Daniel Reeves”
Follow the Yellow Brick Road – http://beeminder.com

That’s a perfect explanation of it. Before getting down to the end of
the post, I was already thinking how perfect it would be to offer some
discount on short circuiting, like your thought of charging $X/4
instead of $X/2. That would definitely make me more likely to short
circuit … I think.

Being charged exactly what I would end up being charged if I went
through each pledge level makes me want to just go through each pledge
level because I want to see if I can reach my goal for less money than
I think. Being able to pay 1/2 of what I would have had to pay going
through each level starts to sound enticing. I get a better deal and
get to start being motivated to make real changes sooner.

Melanie

On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 11:32 PM, Daniel Reeves dreeves@beeminder.com wrote:

We’re about to publish a blog post about this, finally:
blog.beeminder.com/shortcircuit?secretpreview

On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 10:33 PM, Daniel Reeves dreeves@beeminder.com wrote:

it’s ironic how the smaller amounts people pledge the more beeminder makes :slight_smile:
though, amazingly, coughing up $90 pledges has been not entirely
uncommon lately.

paul, note that it’s already the case that you can choose to stay at
lower pledges. we strongly encourage you to go to the next higher
pledge level when you unfreeze but you don’t have to. once you do,
though, you can’t go back down. currently. this proposal would change
that.

On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 10:25 PM, Paul Fenwick paul.j.fenwick@gmail.com wrote:

Love it! I know lots of folks who look at me aghast when I mention the
higher penalty levels. This will allow them to avoid those if they’re good,
and I think will be very good for Beeminder’s bottom line. :slight_smile:

Paul

On Sep 10, 2012 4:46 AM, “Daniel Reeves” dreeves@beeminder.com wrote:

Akratics, wanted to run this proposal by you:
Freebees and the Problem of Deleting Goals

Very short version:

  • Pledge schedule is still $5 → $10 → $30 → $90 → $270 → $810.
  • You can drop back a level at any time, with one-week’s notice.
  • You can jump forward at any time by just paying the current pledge.

I got the idea when talking to an economist about progressive
discipline – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_discipline
where the penalty eventually goes back down if you toe the line long
enough. My idea was to let the user be entirely in control of that,
subject to the akrasia horizon.

I also threw in a proposal for jumping ahead in the pledge schedule
without Beeminder forfeiting those smaller pledge amounts, which is
where we make all our money. We’ve intended to use subscriptions to
solve that problem but this is another way that’s easier to experiment
with.


http://dreev.es – search://“Daniel Reeves”
Follow the Yellow Brick Road – http://beeminder.com


http://dreev.es – search://“Daniel Reeves”
Follow the Yellow Brick Road – http://beeminder.com


http://dreev.es – search://“Daniel Reeves”
Follow the Yellow Brick Road – http://beeminder.com

I’m eager to circulate this blog post to friends of mine who are skeptical
about Beeminder’s apparent perverse incentivization. (Since I’m already a
True Believer, I can’t tell if this will convert any of the unconvinced.)

On Sun, Dec 9, 2012 at 3:19 AM, Melanie Reeves Wicklow <
melanie@beeminder.com> wrote:

That’s a perfect explanation of it. Before getting down to the end of
the post, I was already thinking how perfect it would be to offer some
discount on short circuiting, like your thought of charging $X/4
instead of $X/2. That would definitely make me more likely to short
circuit … I think.

Being charged exactly what I would end up being charged if I went
through each pledge level makes me want to just go through each pledge
level because I want to see if I can reach my goal for less money than
I think. Being able to pay 1/2 of what I would have had to pay going
through each level starts to sound enticing. I get a better deal and
get to start being motivated to make real changes sooner.

Melanie

On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 11:32 PM, Daniel Reeves dreeves@beeminder.com
wrote:

We’re about to publish a blog post about this, finally:
blog.beeminder.com/shortcircuit?secretpreview

On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 10:33 PM, Daniel Reeves dreeves@beeminder.com
wrote:

it’s ironic how the smaller amounts people pledge the more beeminder
makes :slight_smile:

though, amazingly, coughing up $90 pledges has been not entirely
uncommon lately.

paul, note that it’s already the case that you can choose to stay at
lower pledges. we strongly encourage you to go to the next higher
pledge level when you unfreeze but you don’t have to. once you do,
though, you can’t go back down. currently. this proposal would change
that.

On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 10:25 PM, Paul Fenwick <
paul.j.fenwick@gmail.com> wrote:

Love it! I know lots of folks who look at me aghast when I mention the
higher penalty levels. This will allow them to avoid those if they’re
good,

and I think will be very good for Beeminder’s bottom line. :slight_smile:

Paul

On Sep 10, 2012 4:46 AM, “Daniel Reeves” dreeves@beeminder.com
wrote:

Akratics, wanted to run this proposal by you:
Freebees and the Problem of Deleting Goals

Very short version:

  • Pledge schedule is still $5 → $10 → $30 → $90 → $270 → $810.
  • You can drop back a level at any time, with one-week’s notice.
  • You can jump forward at any time by just paying the current pledge.

I got the idea when talking to an economist about progressive
discipline – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_discipline
where the penalty eventually goes back down if you toe the line long
enough. My idea was to let the user be entirely in control of that,
subject to the akrasia horizon.

I also threw in a proposal for jumping ahead in the pledge schedule
without Beeminder forfeiting those smaller pledge amounts, which is
where we make all our money. We’ve intended to use subscriptions to
solve that problem but this is another way that’s easier to experiment
with.


http://dreev.es – search://“Daniel Reeves”
Follow the Yellow Brick Road – http://beeminder.com


http://dreev.es – search://“Daniel Reeves”
Follow the Yellow Brick Road – http://beeminder.com


http://dreev.es – search://“Daniel Reeves”
Follow the Yellow Brick Road – http://beeminder.com

There’s also this more direct rebuttal to the perverse incentives
accusation: http://blog.beeminder.com/perverse/
Not sure if that sounds protesteth-too-much-y.

On Sun, Dec 9, 2012 at 1:18 AM, Michael J.J. Tiffany
michael.tiffany@gmail.com wrote:

I’m eager to circulate this blog post to friends of mine who are skeptical
about Beeminder’s apparent perverse incentivization. (Since I’m already a
True Believer, I can’t tell if this will convert any of the unconvinced.)

On Sun, Dec 9, 2012 at 3:19 AM, Melanie Reeves Wicklow
melanie@beeminder.com wrote:

That’s a perfect explanation of it. Before getting down to the end of
the post, I was already thinking how perfect it would be to offer some
discount on short circuiting, like your thought of charging $X/4
instead of $X/2. That would definitely make me more likely to short
circuit … I think.

Being charged exactly what I would end up being charged if I went
through each pledge level makes me want to just go through each pledge
level because I want to see if I can reach my goal for less money than
I think. Being able to pay 1/2 of what I would have had to pay going
through each level starts to sound enticing. I get a better deal and
get to start being motivated to make real changes sooner.

Melanie

On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 11:32 PM, Daniel Reeves dreeves@beeminder.com
wrote:

We’re about to publish a blog post about this, finally:
blog.beeminder.com/shortcircuit?secretpreview

On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 10:33 PM, Daniel Reeves dreeves@beeminder.com
wrote:

it’s ironic how the smaller amounts people pledge the more beeminder
makes :slight_smile:
though, amazingly, coughing up $90 pledges has been not entirely
uncommon lately.

paul, note that it’s already the case that you can choose to stay at
lower pledges. we strongly encourage you to go to the next higher
pledge level when you unfreeze but you don’t have to. once you do,
though, you can’t go back down. currently. this proposal would change
that.

On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 10:25 PM, Paul Fenwick
paul.j.fenwick@gmail.com wrote:

Love it! I know lots of folks who look at me aghast when I mention the
higher penalty levels. This will allow them to avoid those if they’re
good,
and I think will be very good for Beeminder’s bottom line. :slight_smile:

Paul

On Sep 10, 2012 4:46 AM, “Daniel Reeves” dreeves@beeminder.com
wrote:

Akratics, wanted to run this proposal by you:
Freebees and the Problem of Deleting Goals

Very short version:

  • Pledge schedule is still $5 → $10 → $30 → $90 → $270 → $810.
  • You can drop back a level at any time, with one-week’s notice.
  • You can jump forward at any time by just paying the current pledge.

I got the idea when talking to an economist about progressive
discipline – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_discipline
where the penalty eventually goes back down if you toe the line long
enough. My idea was to let the user be entirely in control of that,
subject to the akrasia horizon.

I also threw in a proposal for jumping ahead in the pledge schedule
without Beeminder forfeiting those smaller pledge amounts, which is
where we make all our money. We’ve intended to use subscriptions to
solve that problem but this is another way that’s easier to
experiment
with.


http://dreev.es – search://“Daniel Reeves”
Follow the Yellow Brick Road – http://beeminder.com


http://dreev.es – search://“Daniel Reeves”
Follow the Yellow Brick Road – http://beeminder.com


http://dreev.es – search://“Daniel Reeves”
Follow the Yellow Brick Road – http://beeminder.com


http://dreev.es – search://“Daniel Reeves”
Follow the Yellow Brick Road – http://beeminder.com