“New systems need new language. Here’s where we define the terms that define us.”
** THIS PAGE IS STILL UNDER CONSTRUCTION **
1. The Commons
Definition: Shared resources and systems (digital, cultural, natural) governed by community stewardship rather than private ownership or state control.
Why It Matters: Art Stoke Commons will be built as a creative commons — not owned, but co-held.
Analogy: Like a community garden where everyone plants, tends, and harvests.
Used In: XXX, tagged as: commons, art-stoke-commons, funding-the-commons, decentralisation
Paired Entry: See also
2. Ecosystem
Definition: An ecosystem is a living, interdependent system of actors (people, orgs, technologies, values, resources) that collectively support a shared purpose or field of transformation (systems change, social impact, ecological impact).
Why It Matters: Impact isn’t solo — it’s relational. Knowing your ecosystem is knowing where you belong.
Analogy: Like a forest — not just a group of trees, but soil, fungi, climate, decay, and regeneration all working together.
Used In: Situating Purpose in a Living System, tagged: #ecosystem #systemschange
Paired Entry: See also
3. Peer-Supported Funding
Definition: Funding flows that are shaped and driven by trust, recognition, and shared values among equals.
Why It Matters: In decentralised systems, community alignment is often more powerful than top-down grants.
Analogy: Like a potluck — everyone brings something, and everyone eats.
Used In: Funding in the Commons, tagged: #fundingmodels #quadraticfunding
Paired Entry: See also
4. DAO (Decentralised Autonomous Organization)
Definition: A collectively-governed digital organization using smart contracts and shared decision-making.
Why It Matters: DAOs are how Art Stoke experiments with new governance and funding models.
Analogy: Like a co-op on the blockchain.
Used In: DAO Governance Concepts, tagged: #DAO #governance
Paired Entry: See also
5. Quadratic Funding (QF)
Definition: A funding model where small donations from many people are amplified more than big donations from a few.
Why It Matters: QF rewards community alignment and ecosystem engagement.
Analogy: Like crowdfunding, but with a math-powered megaphone.
Used In: Funding in the Commons, tagged: #QF #fundingcommons
Paired Entry: See also
6. Reputational Rewards
Definition: A funding mechanism based on peer acknowledgment rather than measurable outputs.
Why It Matters: Cultural and invisible labour is finally visible.
Analogy: Like getting paid because the community values who you are and how you show up.
Used In: Funding in the Commons, tagged: #reputation #commonscredit
Paired Entry: See also
7. Retroactive Public Goods Funding (RetroPGF)
Definition: Rewards for impact that’s already happened and been recognised by others.
Why It Matters: You don’t need permission to start — funding can follow visible contribution.
Analogy: Like getting tipped after a powerful performance, even if you weren’t scheduled.
Used In: Funding in the Commons, tagged: #retroPGF #publicgoods
Paired Entry: See also
8. Mutual Aid
Definition: A decentralized support system where people meet each other’s needs through solidarity, not charity.
Why It Matters: It’s how many creatives and communities survive when institutions fall short.
Analogy: Like friends showing up with soup, rides, or cash — no red tape.
Used In: Mutual Aid as Funding, tagged: #mutualaid #decentralisedcare
Paired Entry: See also
9. Network
Definition: A network is a structure of relationships — a web of connections between people, organisations, platforms, or systems that share, exchange, or collaborate in some way.
Why It Matters: In decentralised ecosystems, your network is how things move — information, resources, support, funding. Whether through DAOs, Discord servers, or peer collaborations, your network shapes your reach and influence. It helps determine who sees your work, who amplifies it, and who shows up to support you.
Analogy: Like a circulatory system — networks carry the nutrients (attention, trust, collaboration) that keep your project alive.
Key Insight: A strong network increases visibility, but an aligned network deepens impact. Mapping your network helps you understand where you’re connected — and where you’re not yet in flow.
Used In: Funding in the Commons Article, Situating Purpose in a Living System, tagged: #network, #peerrelations, #trustflow
Paired Entry: See also
10. Non-Peer (Traditional) Funding Networks
Definition: Centralised funding systems where resources are distributed by institutions, foundations, or investors through top-down processes, formal criteria, or gatekeeping mechanisms.
Why It Matters: These networks still dominate global funding flows — from government grants to venture capital. While they can provide large-scale resources, they often prioritise control, compliance, and competition over trust, values, or community alignment. For creators and system changers working in the commons, these models can be extractive, opaque, or misaligned with decentralised principles.
Analogy: Like applying for a bank loan — you need to fit the template, prove your worth, and wait for approval.
Key Insight: Traditional networks rely on gatekeepers. Peer-supported networks rely on signal. Knowing which model you’re navigating helps you decide whether to pitch your idea, or co-create it in public.
Used In: Funding in the Commons Article, Peer-Supported vs Traditional Funding, tagged: #traditionalfunding, #centralisedmodels, #gatekeepers
Paired Entry: See also
11. Gatekeeping
Definition: The act of controlling access to resources, visibility, or opportunity — often through institutional filters, eligibility criteria, or discretionary power. Gatekeepers decide who gets in, who gets funded, and who gets heard.
Why It Matters: Gatekeeping is a defining feature of traditional funding systems. It can safeguard quality — but it can also exclude unconventional voices, undervalue lived experience, and reinforce existing power structures. In decentralised ecosystems, we experiment with networked trust, peer signal, and mutual recognition to reduce or bypass the need for gatekeepers.
Analogy: Like a velvet rope at the club — someone else decides if you’re “on the list.”
Key Insight: Gatekeeping limits access by design. In the commons, we’re building models where access is earned through contribution, not credentials.
Used In: Funding in the Commons Article, Commons vs Institutions, tagged: #gatekeeping, #access, #institutionallogic
Paired Entry: See also Peer-Supported Funding, Non-Peer (Traditional) Funding Networks