I was thinking today, about this site, what it is. What musings Carleas made about the change to the new software (trying to bring dignity back).
For me, I always felt that the internet is clearly the new “thing,” the new true institution. Where once it was Museaeums, later Academies, later Universities, etc, now it’s an internet forum. At least for me, that is what should be. It is the perfect forum and format for a collegiate. Imagine a thing like that but with hardly any rules and you don’t even drive anywhere, you just wake up, scratch your balls, or little pussy, sit at the computer and log on.
I also feel that, f rom Carleas’s musings, part of the goal of the overhaul is to attract people back, or for the first time, but people of a very specific type. People that might fit this collegeate atmosphere. His comments about dryness not being so terrible for a place to discuss philosophy.
Now, a collegiate isn’t only a place for like minded intellectuals to meet and discuss, it should also be a place where some work by them gets done, a place that produces. One thing, the production, attracts the other, the discussioin, and vice versa.
With this in mind, I propose the following: that a bimonthly award be given to one submission, decided by Carleas by whatever means he deems fit, of $200. That just seems like a nice figure to me that doesn’t break a bank, but is money. So $1,200 yearly. If the thing gets going, maybe Carleas can start asking for contributions to the awards fund and even skim some, take a percentage, and have the site pay for itself some day. Maybe not, the point is what the experiment would aim to achieve. News about money being awarded has a way of travelling, and reaching the people fit to try to claim it.
I would organize it thus: that, for example, during January and February, submissions be accepted to be studied during the March April period for the April 31st award. The awarded would receive the money and possibly title of Ilp of The Month, or possibly also Most Doct.
Each submission would require an email address that can receive the award by paypal, and only one submission per payment address.
A word limit, maybe 3,000 or something, and a cheat allowed of unlimited appendices which the submission cannot rely on being studied.
Though, to be fair, nothing would be able to rely on being studied. The system would rely on the Internet and the Rules That Govern It. Not only doctness, but rhetoric would determine winners. If Carleas felt, after 10 words, like going tldr, that would be a more than proper method of judging that submission. I’m not saying Carleas can’t delegate judging somehow, but just as an example.
All submissions would be sent to him directly, then posted in a new subforum by Carleas.
Shit, something to consider.