COMMUNITY WELFARE PROGRAM, Revision of the Original Plan
If you would like to receive this document in PDF format, contact us:
Table of Contents
Part 1 Community Welfare Program
Project development is a process that requires time, patience, perseverance, and belief in one’s abilities. Anyone who has ever presented a project to the public knows it is complicated. The final model of the project will show significant differences from the model that was first shown to the public. That is no different with us. In the development phase, you have to go through a test process, in our case, by introducing the project to others. At first, as a hypothesis, which again complicates it because people consider it a dream, and dreams rarely become a reality. But by sharing the project with others, we get a better idea of what is feasible or bottlenecks that need to be changed. These changes and improvements are discussed in this blog.
The project plans were previously described in a project paper and presented to the public.  We recommend reading this document first if you still need to become familiar with the content. Below is a brief description of the plans: The Community Welfare Program (CWP) is a social welfare program for all individual members within a particular community. The composition of a group of participants may differ as long as the objectives of the CWP are maintained. We choose to have all families within a neighborhood community participate in the CWP. A neighborhood community is deemed eligible to participate in the CWP based on an average annual income per family below the GDP per capita for the year in question, which is set at USD 4,291.80 for 2021.
The objectives of the CWP are to reduce the wealth gap for the concerned members and to achieve a better financial future for the members by enabling financial planning. In addition, we strengthen the community’s economic situation to withstand economically uncertain times better. Each participant is allocated a budget of at least two average annual incomes of a member of the broader community. For the model we use, the personal budget is based on the average yearly household income of the wider community members. So if the average family income of the members within the community is set at, for example, IDR 50,000,000, then the members have a budget of IDR 100,000,000. (Again, in the model we’re using, the members are all households within a particular community, so an individual member is an entire family, not an individual, so the budget is for the whole family, not for each person of the family.)
To do full justice to all the objectives of the CWP, we use three themes within the program: Individual, Communal, and Future; these are the three pillars of the CWP:
- Individual: Direct benefit to members is necessary for the adoption of the CWP to continue, and one will wonder why they need the CWP. The program starts with an individual theme, in which the participant receives a personal budget. This is not intended to supplement the family income but as a financial reserve in case of emergency. It is a credit reserve that they can freely dispose of, but a withdrawal from the personal credit reserve comes with a repayment plan. It is up to the participant whether he keeps to the agreement. However, if the participant doesn’t comply with the arrangements made several times, this can ultimately lead to exclusion from the program.
We choose this solution because everything stands or falls within fulfilling agreements. If no conditions are attached to the use of the money, then people will consume it without benefiting in the long run. People often live paycheck to paycheck; at the end of the month, there is probably nothing left to set aside for emergencies or extraordinary expenses. We want to inform participants of the benefits of money management and that they can independently have a financial safety net through manageable costs.
Of the total budget, one-third of the funds will be made available for this pillar of the CWP. This is an interest-free personal credit reserve. Once the participants are allocated the amount, it is theirs and will not be taken away; it is up to the individual members how they ultimately deal with the expenses and repayments.
- Communal: Within this pillar, the participant receives a budget to invest with the other community members in financing (local) business activities. When a community member submits a funding application, it gets priority in the underwriting process. We recommend that the members only provide financing within this pillar for short to medium term (1 to a maximum of 24 months).
The members are jointly allowed to vote on a financing application and the amount each participant will add to the total investment. The member concerned will be allowed to share the investment proceeds proportionate to the respective participation amount. By participating in this pillar, members are enabled to increase the principal amount of the personal credit reserve or, in this way, contribute to the repayment of outstanding amounts under Pillar 1 of the CWP.
The reason we want to carry out this process together has to do with solidarity. We are building a stronger community together and reaping the benefits together. In addition, it must be possible to finance multiple projects to achieve a positive result and drastically reduce the chance of failure. If the members have to do this independently, they can make little or no diversified investments. Then there is the risk of a disastrous outcome with all the associated financial and social consequences.
- Future: Within this pillar, members receive the offer to save and invest with a longer time horizon. The proceeds from these investments can be used for major later-term expenses, such as retirement, a college scholarship for a relative, or a down payment on a house or whatever. Ultimately, it is up to the members concerned where they want to spend the proceeds of the investments. However, when a member withdraws an amount and reduces the total amount within this pillar to less than the initial amount, participation in the CWP will be terminated.
With the help of an investment coach, participants can have a risk profile drawn up and decide which investment products they want to invest in. Initially, there will be a modest number of products, but we expect to be able to offer a wide variety of investment products within a few years. Members decide for themselves which products they choose.
Above, the reader has just been able to read a short description of the Community Welfare Program and the three different pillars within the program. For a more substantive description of the project, we refer to the full content of this blog and previously published documentation about the CWP.
Initiator’s Note: This program was not designed to make anyone rich. What is wealth, and why should we pursue it? This is not about amassing wealth at all. This program is designed to provide members with structural financial change. We are talking about a drastic change for an entire family from just USD 6,700.00 to USD 10,000.00 in a way that will leave no one feeling shortchanged, not even the investor who gets more than enough value for money. That is the difference we can make, not for 1 or 100 but soon for a million or more families anywhere in the world. And that’s just a start. This program will not drastically change world poverty, at least not by us alone. This program shows we can act together and make a difference in our community. A community does not have to be defined by physical boundaries; a society can arise because we want to pursue a goal together. This can be achieved, and at the same time, everyone can benefit from it. By realizing this, we can set an example that others can pick up and repeat; then, we can make a difference together.
Why a Community Welfare Program?
In particular, the “Great Recession”  of 2007-08 has revived the discussion about a Universal Basic Income (UBI).  But more than a discussion, what has been achieved so far? This question will remain largely unanswered because, aside from some well-intentioned initiatives, few have made a difference and never progressed beyond the initiative phase. Indeed no initiatives have been tested over several years or introduced as standard. Meanwhile, the wealth gap is widening. In general, a UBI has two weaknesses in the commonly used format:
- How should a program like UBI be financed long-term? No more thought has been given to this other than shifting existing budgets or through an increase in taxes for the wealthy and companies.
- Putting the ball in the government’s hands to run a UBI program can jeopardize its long-term survival. The UBI will always be the plaything of politics during elections; there will always be a threat of a changing political landscape or economic situation that could stop such projects. We find this unacceptable for the beneficiaries of such initiatives.
Should we do nothing at all? No, doing nothing is ignoring the problem. The situation we are in because of the pandemic has again made it clear that something must be done. A vast majority of the world’s population has suffered very negative economic consequences from this pandemic. While some governments provide financial support to their citizens during a pandemic, others cannot offer any assistance. Globally hardest hit are people in the lowest income bracket.
All this does not alter the fact that our objections to a program such as the UBI remain. Again, these objections are not there because of the objectives pursued by such programs. The complaints mainly lie in the financial underpinning of such initiatives. Added to this is the potential threat that there may come a time when such projects cease to exist because they are no longer on a new government’s political or economic agenda. Introducing a program such as UBI, letting participants anticipate it, and terminating it for whatever reason after a while, what is that for a solution? Because who is going to solve the problems that arise from this? For a UBI to succeed, it is vital to spend the money provided rather than saving it for later. Getting used to extra financial resources is faster than anyone would think. One more thing: “Don’t start a popularity contest on the backs of others.”
Initiator’s Note: Take a country like the Netherlands, with more than 13.5 million inhabitants over 20, with a monthly contribution from the UBI of 500 euros; the annual government obligation is 81 billion euros. In the case of the Netherlands, this would therefore be more than 24% of government revenue. 
This is such an expense that it will be a point of discussion every year when the national budget should be compiled. Governments will only be willing to commit to such a program briefly. Besides the above, if you get a government to implement UBI as a policy, you have created the ultimate form of “Shush” money. “Shush” money is a form of payment where the payer tells the recipient to be quiet.
“Never bite the hand that feeds you.” This can lead to an imbalance for the recipients, those who do not need it have a dominant position over those who urgently need such a financial contribution. This drastically undermines the objective of reducing the wealth gap.
An example is the incentive checks issued to the public during the pandemic outbreak, and what did they do with it? Stock markets skyrocketed, and governments continued to sell nonsense that the economy was robust enough to withstand the pandemic. The public was lulled to sleep with what they believed to be quick-earned riches. Few dared to openly criticize the government’s actions because you were soon dismissed as a conspiracy theorist; you disrupted the party of many around you.
What eventually remains of all those quickly amassed riches? Nothing. Billions have since evaporated, and all we’re doing is yelling at the government to come up with something better soon. The ever-increasing inflation is now hitting the public, and we have yet to be armed against such a calamity. We don’t need a government that gives money away as a gift but quietly manipulates how we spend it. We, as a community, know better; we can help our neighbors do better. Together we can make a difference.
Then there are several things where our initiative deviates from the model the UBI has chosen. Regulation and commitment are essential within our model. Members are free to spend the budget within Pillar 1 as they see fit. We expect members to adhere to the agreements made in the repayment schedule. The schedule is an agreement each member makes for themselves, but we closely monitor adherence to it. The repayment schedule mainly contains agreements about the frequency and amount of the repayment. If a member concerned does not have sufficient financial resources and cannot fulfill the arrangements, the member is offered the opportunity to perform “paid” activities. If the member concerned does not want to use the options offered and does not want to comply with the agreements, sanctions will follow, leading to complete exclusion from the program.
The CWP has not been developed to supplement existing income but is intended as a financial safety net for “emergencies” when expenditure must be incurred without the financial resources being readily available. However, it is ultimately up to the members to determine what the credit reserve is used for, as long as agreements on repayment and frequency are respected. We only give advice but do not restrict the available resources; everyone should be free to decide what is important to them. We emphasize fulfilling existing obligations because it entails a certain degree of (financial) discipline. This program is meant for the long term, not just for a short-term feeling of happiness.
Key Features of the Community Welfare Program:
- A member receives a financial reserve equal to twice the average annual income of the group members. If the members have an average yearly income of USD 5,000.00, then the financial credit reserve for each member is USD 10,000.00.
- This financial reserve can be used for three purposes:
- Pillar 1 – Individual; One-third of the amount in the financial reserve can be used individually by a member to increase spending temporarily. The funds are made available through a revolving loan agreement with the members. To access the funds, a member must meet the loan agreement terms. A member submits an application stating the loan amount, including the number of repayment installments and the repayment amount per installment. As long as the member concerned adheres to the agreements made, the total amount under this pillar remains at the member’s disposal.
- Pillar 2 – Communal; A second part of the reserve, again a third of the available amount, can be used to finance commercial projects within the own community. This is done together with the other members of the community. By doing this jointly, the members have more financial capacity to spread investments and thus reduce risks. Preference is given to short-term investments, max six months, to the medium term, max eighteen months. This is ideal for micro and small businesses with little or no access to the traditional banking system and often rely on loan sharks who charge sky-high interest rates. The organization assesses each investment request for reliability and feasibility and then submits it to the members for voting. Members can vote on whether an application will be honored with the required investment. When done carefully, individual members and the entire community benefit from the CWP. It ensures a more robust local economy that can provide employment and social cohesion in the longer term. A prosperous local economy contributes to a thriving society, and there will be less economic migration from the community, with all the associated benefits.
- Pillar 3 – Future; The third part is intended for savings and investments. A risk profile is drawn up for each participant, to which the range of investment products will be tailored. Initially, the organization will introduce a limited number of products. However, we expect that once the value of the CWP has been demonstrated, outside financial institutions will be willing to provide products for this part of the CWP. It must be clear to all parties involved that it is only about saving and investing with a long-term horizon. We will coordinate with external financial institutions to only introduce products that embrace the philosophy of the CWP.
- Members receive support and training to get the most out of participating in the CWP.
- A “job bank” is set up for members to perform (paid) work. This concerns temporary jobs that can be carried out in addition to the regular position. The job bank cannot be used for recruiting staff or obtaining a full-time job. If a member cannot repay on time due to insufficient financial resources, the member concerned can appeal to the job bank. A fee is paid for all work performed, which can be used to reimburse the monetary reserve. Suppose more work is available in the job bank than members who need to use this opportunity to repay the loan. In that case, members can also apply for assignments to generate additional income for the financial reserve. It is expected that work will be offered on the job bank by the entire community. In this way, the whole community can be helped, both the provider of work because the work is completed and the person who performs the job because he can earn a supplementary income. We will start with that ourselves, hoping the community will see the benefits and follow suit.
- If a member does not comply with the agreements or abuses the financial reserve, a system of fines will come into effect, ultimately leading to the complete exclusion of the member concerned from the total program.
The structure of the Community Welfare Program Foundation
We have opted for a foundation as a legal entity for the CWP. The Master Foundation is responsible for compliance with all (local) laws and regulations regarding the CWP. In addition, the Master Foundation must monitor the culture and guarantee the sustainability of the CWP. The master foundation is located in Indonesia; in other countries where the CWP will be active, a national foundation will be established that is supervised by the master foundation. The Country Foundation will be responsible for compliance with all locally applicable laws and regulations. For all operational activities related to the members of the CWP, local community foundations and associations will be established; the master and country foundations will direct all local foundations.
The master foundation is structured as a non-profit organization; the purpose of the foundation is to organize and supervise the Community Welfare Program. Program participants are the program’s beneficiaries but not members of the foundation itself. It is up to the foundation and its board to clarify the implications of participating in the program for participants, such as compliance with taxes and other laws and regulations so that beneficiaries are not affected. However, this does not mean that the foundation and its board are responsible for any beneficiary tax payments. It is ultimately the responsibility of the individual beneficiaries to make these tax payments. The foundation is responsible for informing the participants about laws and regulations and, where possible, negotiating with the various authorities when this concerns the entire program and all beneficiaries. In individual cases, the foundation can advise and instruct the relevant beneficiaries.
The master foundation is headed by the chairman and supported by the board of commissioners. The Chairman and Commissioners are appointed for at least four years. Qualified candidates can be nominated for the Chairperson or Commissioners position. The holders of the Utility tokens vote for the appointment of the Chairman and Commissioners. The chairman will lead a general board for all operational activities.
In addition to the organizational responsibility for the CWP, the master foundation is also responsible for the trust, and the Chairman of the Master Foundation becomes the trustee. The trust oversees the administration of the Utility Tokens and other financial resources allocated to the CWP.
The various structural components of the CWP and Master Foundation are described in more detail below:
As described earlier, the position of chairman will have to be voted on. The founders will initially appoint the chairman, but after the first year, the Utility token holders can vote on whether the current chairperson can remain in office or whether the procedure is started to elect a new chairperson. We choose this structure because the Utility token holders contribute the capital to make all this possible. Transparency and accountability to the Utility token holders do not conflict with the independence of the CWP.
One of the essential tasks of the chairman is to make the CWP independent of the financial contribution of the Utility Token Holders as soon as possible. However, the CWP will never be separated from the Utility tokens and the holders. It is up to both camps to maintain a good relationship. Transparency and accountability continue beyond the relationship with the Utility token holders; it is only the first step in this process. The chairperson and the organization must publish annual reports and make them accessible to anyone who wishes this information. This will also help with the expansion of the CWP.
Herein lies another essential task for the chairman, stability and sustainability will contribute to the expansion of the CWP. The success of the CWP can be measured by the number of members who gain access to the CWP. The capital injections of the three financing rounds make it possible to onboard +5,000 members into the CWP. This will have to be done as soon as possible. But this is only a start; when these numbers are reached, it should not be considered a success for the CWP. Then it will only start; after this step, it will become clear whether the CWP can continue to grow without these direct capital injections.
It is up to the chairman and the team to introduce a plan for how the CWP can grow from 5,000 members to 100,000, 500,000, and ultimately the desired target of 1,000,000 beneficiaries. Then we can speak of success when these numbers are achieved. We need all parts of the entire project, including the Utility token holders. A well-run CWP organization is like cement between the building blocks and floors that keep everything together; that is another task for the chairman to take care of. The foundation and the chairman have nothing to do with Blockchain development or (new) business development activities. They should focus solely on the operational activities of the CWP and all aspects involved. But this should function like a well-oiled machine.
Another task is for the chairman as trustee of the trust that falls under the CWP; 21% of tokens intended for the CWP will be placed in this trust. These tokens do not go to the members but rather serve as a financial buffer for the long-term stability of the CWP. The chairman will lead this and ensure the tokens are well spent for the cause. The chairman will cooperate with his team to manage and spend the financial resources but will be responsible as a gatekeeper.
It can be a complicated situation for the chairperson, as incorrect spending of the tokens can directly lead to the dismissal of the chairperson while the chairperson is performing their duties for the CWP very well. But appointing an independent trustee is not an option, as the trustee can run his agenda and lose sight of the interests of the CWP. Ultimately, the tokens are destined for the CWP, and the chairman is always in contact with the token holders, so there is a direct line of communication. Ultimately, any spending of the tokens will be a joint decision between the chairman and the token holders.
The Trust is designed for the CWP to house the tokens and other financial resources intended for the stability of the CWP. These tokens do not directly accrue to the members, but any proceeds from sales, investments, and lending will go to the CWP and thus benefit the members. 24.5% of all tokens are destined for the treasury of the CWP; these tokens come in a trust agreement. The chairman of the master foundation is the trustee of the trust. The management and custody agreement (trust agreement) will contain clear guidelines for the chairman to work with. Initially, we will establish the trust and construct the trust agreement, but at some point needs to be ratified by the Utility token holders.
It should be clear that we must spend the tokens sparingly. These tokens are intended to ensure the long-term stability and continuity of the CWP. Issuing the tokens directly affects the vulnerability of the CWP. The Utility token holders have a direct role to play in this; it is in their immediate interest to handle the contents of the trust with care. Everyone should know that the sales of tokens can only be made once. It should be possible to issue tokens of the trust under stringent conditions, and even then, caution is advised.
There are other options to make the tokens in the trust profitable for the CWP. Third parties can borrow the tokens, provided sufficient collateral is provided. The tokens can provide enough liquidity on various exchanges and many other options. We propose that there are clear guidelines for the administrator/chairman and an ongoing clear risk profile with which the token holders can make decisions. In addition, the token holders must always give prior permission when selling tokens.
Regardless of the activities, it should be clear to everyone that the proceeds of all activities in the trust will have to go entirely to the CWP. No remuneration for the management of the trust will be paid, and no costs for third parties can be reimbursed from the proceeds of activities within the Trust. Only an exception can be made for direct transaction costs. But if a third party wants to use the tokens for lending, all transaction costs must be passed on to the third party. The master foundation will bear costs incurred by third parties for advice or the like, and the company will pay these costs in full for the first two years.
As soon as the issuance of the tokens takes place and the Waqf has been drawn up, all documents regarding the Waqf, management of the tokens, and mandate of the trustee will be translated and published for the token holders. The trust will be structured according to the laws and regulations of a Waqf (Wakaf); this is an official construction within Indonesian law and has a straightforward tax-technical approach. In a separate report, the functioning of the Waqf and possible differences with the trust in other jurisdictions will be discussed in more detail and a clear explanation from our side of why we have chosen the construction of a Waqf over an Anglo-Saxon model of a Trust.
Board of Commissioners
The Board of Commissioners has a dual function; firstly, the board holds a supervisory role; they control the chairman and the general management. Secondly, they also have an advisory and supporting role for the chairman, general management, and all operational units within the foundation and sub-departments. They see to it that the chairman and the general management perform their duties according to the mandate given to them by the foundation and the Utility token holders.
The Board of Commissioners will initially have at least three seats. However, it can be extended to a minimum of five seats, with the founders reserving the right to designate a minimum of two. The commissioner’s appointment is for four years; if deemed necessary for the stability of the CWP, the commissioner concerned may be re-elected for a new period of four years.
At least four times a year, the board, including the Board of Commissioners, must meet to discuss the complete state of affairs regarding the CWP. A joint report of these meetings will be submitted each calendar quarter to the token holders. Independent of the Chairman, the Board of Commissioners must prepare an annual report and present it to the token holders. Following this report, the token holders will have to vote on the functioning of the Board and its commissioners.
The founders believe it is in the interest of a well-functioning and supportive board of commissioners. Therefore, they deem people with different expertise necessary for a board position. In any case, at least one commissioner must have a legal, financial, or business background. In addition, the board of commissioners must also install a body that supervises the trust and asset management activities. These bodies directly inform the supervisory board, after which the board of commissioners reports to the token holders. The chairperson of the master foundation cannot exercise any influence over the content of these reports.
Board of Advisory
An advisory board will be established, but this council will not have an official function in the foundation’s policy and its components. The advisory board aims to collect specific information to help with the policymaking and execution of day-to-day activities. This can be advice on all fronts that the Chairman and the Board of Commissioners believe will be necessary to inform better the token holders and the public about the state of affairs. The CWP deals with complex matters and will not have all the knowledge required to formulate certain decisions and propose them to the token holders. But also, with the execution of the CWP and the members, an advisory board can ensure enough knowledge available to make the project successful.
An example of where the advisory board can make a substantial contribution is the complexity surrounding the financial illiteracy of most members of the CWP. How can this be improved, and what can be done structurally to prevent this? If the foundation doesn’t deal with this properly, there can be a risk that the turnover of members will be huge. The members will not immediately understand why all activities within the CWP are necessary. People will want to gain personal economic advantage from it but will try to ignore all other things as much as possible. If this problem is not recognized and addressed sufficiently, we are no better than all other well-intentioned initiatives. Then the project will eventually end in a fiasco.
There will also be a research lab under the Advisory Council, where collaboration with colleges and universities can be ratified. The importance of this collaboration lies in the fields of data collection and education. The results will help the CWP’s operational activities and game development. Games can help speed up project customization among members. The whole community will surely benefit from this.
Here is a world to win. As part of the research institute, a separate department will be set up to investigate the possibilities and impossibilities of Islamic financial protocol in modern economic systems. What is the meaning of all the jurisprudence surrounding this subject, and how can we apply this in blockchain and crypto? How can we make these traditional protocols applicable in defi and blockchain? These protocols can bring more benefits to the community and its members than it will bring harm. But this will have to be researched and, where possible, assessed academically. What can we learn from it, and what might be better not to make it applicable? No one can give an unequivocal answer, but it could help the entire crypto community.
This will be the asset manager for the funds of the CWP and BDF; the asset manager falls directly under the foundation’s chairman. They do not make policy themselves; they are implementers and must exercise a high degree of prudence in the performance of their activities. The asset manager cannot make and implement decisions unilaterally but can advise the chairperson. The chairperson, in turn, will have to seek advice from the Board of Commissioners and the token holders before this advice can be adopted or set aside.
The asset management department is appointed to develop a standard risk profile model for the members of the CWP. In addition, the asset management must compile a portfolio of savings and investment products from which members can choose to use under pillar three of the CWP. These may be products developed by asset management or composed of offerings from third parties. A third-party product can only be offered when complete research has been done by asset management and finally approved by the entire board of the foundation.
In addition, the asset manager will have a role in evaluating financing applications for the second pillar. The asset manager will be asked to assess whether it will be viable. It is not necessarily binding advice, but at the very least, it must be a substantiation where a possible financing application falls short.
If the CWP expands its activities to other countries, then the management in each country should establish a foundation. All activities in that country will fall under this entity. The country foundation is responsible to the Master Foundation; the country foundation is obliged to adhere to the policies and guidelines set by the Master Foundation. Adjustments can only be made when necessary due to local laws and regulations. Every country foundation must take care of local fundraising. They will have their country-specific community token at their disposal. However, the monetary policy for that community token will be dictated by the master foundation with the support of the Asset Manager. Circulation and price strongly depend on the local situation.
The country foundation and local chapters will have full access to all facilities of the CWP, and their members can use the marketplace and job bank. The community tokens are exchangeable with other country-specific community tokens; acquiring products and services from other communities should be possible.
Each department of the CWP will have a work unit responsible for carrying out all operational work related to the members. They will have to make members aware of all the possibilities of the CWP and the responsibilities of the members. In addition, the local chapters will have to provide courses where members learn to deal with all facets of the CWP. This can be in groups but also personal classes. Especially in the beginning, it will be more proactive in guiding the members, with a more passive and supporting function later in the background.
The work units are organized as a department and do not have to be entities. Depending on the membership size, a foundation or association is established per region, positioned under the Master Foundation or a Country Foundation. This regional entity is an executive body and cannot independently implement or change policies and procedures; this remains the sole responsibility of the master foundation.
Frequently Asked Questions:
Why a community-oriented program and not an initiative aimed at individual members?
Because we rely on the power of group dynamics, the overall program includes components based on the individual but is not exclusively individualistic. Within a group, people can support each other and discover the possibilities of the program together. There is nothing wrong with doing things together. We hope for a dynamic in which the group comes closer together, stands together for a specific goal, and strives for it.
We hope there will be a natural process of social control among the concerned members of the community. This process can have a curative effect if one of the members wants to avoid following the rules for participating in the program. Members will support and assist each other if a particular member is in danger of losing their membership in the program.
The CWP has families within a particular community as members; are single-person households excluded from participation?
Here in Klaten – Indonesia, where the CWP kicks off, the choice is made to make families the members/beneficiaries of the program. This is done because every household is registered as a family (Kartu keluarga). Single-person households also form independent households and are therefore considered a family. But to avoid further discussion, it should be clear that a group can be composed in whatever way is thought best for all participants within that group. Suppose it is decided elsewhere not to put together a group of members within a fixed living environment but to select the participants based on other characteristics. That is possible as long as a group of at least 25-40 individual members is formed to get the most out of the group dynamics.
A conscious decision was made to choose for all families within a specific neighborhood community in the group’s composition and not to opt for a group composition according to strict preconditions. You automatically get a greater diversity within a particular group, variety in:
- Family composition
- Knowledge and experience in the field of education and employment
Strict parameters in the group composition can lead to a high degree of homogeneity from which the participants cannot easily escape. It is motivating if positive examples can be found in the immediate vicinity. The whole program risks its goal of getting a better future financially, mentally, and physically (health) when there is too much homogeneity in the group composition.
The CWP provides credit; credit is debt. Does that not violate the purpose of guaranteeing participants a better financial future?
The financial reserve is provided to all participants through revolving credit. It is an interest-free form of credit with an emphasis on agreements. Agreements about repayment and frequency. These are the conditions for using the budget under Pillar 1.
We want to avoid reducing budget spending to a one-off event. People will likely find short-term satisfaction from one-time spending because a significant amount wasn’t available before, but that’s about it. How different is this if the budget remains intact and usable for members when needed? Structurally nothing changes, and it has little or no effect.
The program aims to provide the beneficiaries with a better financial future; this goal cannot be achieved if it is a one-time donation or if the program is temporary. Once a member has been allocated their budget within the program, the total amount under Pillar 1 is available. The organization or any other outsider cannot take it away. However, when a member refuses to abide by the terms of participation in the CWP or misuses the program in such a way, participation in the CWP may be terminated, and the member concerned will lose access to the facilities of Pillar 2 and 3.
All families in a given community automatically become members of the CWP, but what if a family does not want to participate in the program?
The budget for all members is available; it is the free will of all members whether they want to use it. Only if a member indicates that he does not wish to participate will we ask permission from the member concerned to make the part of the budget intended for Pillar 2 available so it can still be used for this purpose. Any return on investment is added to the member’s financial reserve.
Should a member who initially opted not to participate in the CWP change their mind, they may begin to join at any time. The budget is allocated to all members, and whether they want to use it at the start or after ten years remains the same possibility of participation.
Is participation in the CWP indefinitely, or are there options to terminate participation early and have the principal paid out?
There have yet to be any concrete plans, but we are toying with offering 10% of the participants the opportunity to end their participation every year. The idea is to choose a fixed time each year at which the request to cancel the membership can be submitted. After this period, a random selection can occur, whereby, for example, members who can stop participating in the program are chosen under the supervision of a notary. Or we can opt for a first in, first out model when requesting termination. The first person to submit the request has the best chance of ending.
However, the 10% also includes the number of members whose membership is terminated for malpractice or negligence. In the event of the death of one of the members and if no heirs are living in the community, the participation in the CWP is terminated, and the budget of the financial reserve, after deduction of any costs, goes to the legal heirs. In addition, it must also be considered that a family can move out of the community; if the new living environment does not yet participate in the CWP, participation will also be terminated if the whole family moves.
If a transaction occurs due to the above cases, it will be done in crypto tokens. It is up to the member concerned about what he wants to do with the crypto coins. But it should be clear that they can no longer count on further involvement or support from the CWP, and the member concerned will have to manage his tokens himself. The Member can sell their Tokens to the Organization or other suitable candidates upon termination.
Summary progress developments of the CWP
The changes/additions we have made so far from the original plan are twofold: we’ve developed a framework for the CWP that won’t change much, although we’ll always keep working on the details to improve it. The program will be continuously tested on the user experience of the members.
- The original plan assumed that new members would be given a certain amount of crypto tokens. We will not change this plan, but a separation has been made between the Utility- and Community tokens. The new members will be assigned community tokens, which can only be used within the program, or they can be used to purchase products that we offer in the various online stores, possibly later in physical outlets. Members are no longer allocated Utility tokens. The conversion rate of the Utility token will be volatile, especially in the initial phase. Determining the fixed conversion rate and how many tokens should be allocated to each new member is impossible. In addition, the price value of the Utility token will have much lower value from the start than, for example, in 5 or 10 years. This would mean that the first members will be allocated a disproportionate number of tokens in the longer term; more on this topic in the next chapter of this project paper.
- The “job bank”; After frequent consultation with experts, we realized we needed to develop an opportunity for members to create a revenue model for the monthly repayments on their credit reserve. Most members’ current monthly or annual income does not allow them to repay borrowed amounts within the foreseeable future structurally. The most important thing is that, despite a possible lack of financial resources, members can still fulfill the agreements when withdrawing an amount from the personal credit reserve.
Initiator’s Note: We can give away an amount and see what everyone does with it. However, several (pilot) projects show that this will have little effect on the financial position of the beneficiaries in the longer term. We have written about this in the project documentation,  where the reader can find links to various reports on the subject. Partly as a result of these investigations, we have been strengthened in our plans for a personal credit reserve. But then we come to the next point when the members want to withdraw a significant amount from the personal credit reserve. One-third of the total amount is intended for the personal credit reserve. That is an amount equal to 67% of the average annual income. What is a reasonable period within which the amount must be repaid?
A small calculation:
Personal credit reserve: Rp 120.000.000
Average annual income: Rp 60,000,000
1/3 of the personal credit reserve: Rp 40,000,000
The disposable annual income of Rp 60,000,000 is Rp 5,000,000 per month, repayment scope of a maximum of 10% of the monthly salary, or Rp 500,000
Rp 40,000,000 / 500,000 = 80 months, or 6.6 years.
For indicative purposes;
The rate of the Indonesian Rupiah at the time of writing this blog is:
USD 1.00/IDR 14,500
EUR 1.00/IDR 15,300
It is up to the reader to judge whether this is reasonable and whether strong member engagement for the CWP will continue under these circumstances. If we left it at that, we would not offer a solution but a burden for the participants. Another factor is taken into account in the creation of the CWP. There is a powerful urge within the community to generate additional income. Nearly one in three families have activities at home to create extra income. The fact that this does not lead to structural successes that should give most families a better financial future is due to one main reason: the need for start-up capital or investment capital. That is, of course, not the only cause but the most crucial cause. With the second part of the personal credit reserve, we have already primarily addressed the problem of seed capital or investment capital.
Only some have a creative plan to generate additional income. Hence the job bank. In the beginning, this part will require much attention, like everything within the CWP, but it will be almost automatic in the long run. While we will have trouble finding enough paid work that members can perform initially, it will come naturally in the future. Because the job providers will also see the benefits, one of the rules when providing financing to entrepreneurs may be that they submit tasks/jobs to the job bank. As we have discussed before, the CWP should not only help the individual members but also strengthen the community; this is one of the parts that can help.
In addition, if the entrepreneur provides work for the job bank and the members carry out those tasks, it increases the involvement in the investment on both sides. It is up to all members to take these opportunities seriously. Whether they do the work themselves, with the whole family, or individually, it is up to the members to decide. We only provide guidance and insight into how members can improve their financial position in the longer term.
We ask the reader to put themselves in the situation of the members of the CWP; we are here not talking about people who have sufficient opportunities to realize a better financial future independently. For convenience, we calculate an average annual income of Rp 50 million. That sounds a lot by Western standards, but let’s put that in cold numbers:
Whether these figures give any impression is for the reader to judge himself. Nearly 13% of the population living below the poverty line is alarmingly high. It should be added that these figures only refer to individuals aged 15 and over. So if the youth is added to that, this figure will be even higher. Less than $329.00/$347.00 per year is shockingly low. In 2022, more than 158,000 people will have to live on less than such income in this region. That’s just one region in Indonesia; in the whole province, we are talking about more than 4 million people; knowing that the island of Java is the most prosperous part of Indonesia, what about the rest of the country?
Of course, Indonesia is not the only country where poverty and the wealth gap are a problem; it occurs worldwide. But we live here, and we are confronted with issues daily, and that’s why this made us think. What can be done so that everyone benefits from participating in the CWP? We would like to see this initiative also taken up by others and rolled out further in the area where they live. We develop the infrastructure of the CWP, everything is documented, experiences are shared, and we are ready to support anyone who wants to roll this out in the community they see fit.
With this, we’ve covered most of what needed to be discussed about the CWP. We are still debating the proper legal structure; this discussion mainly concerns the local departments. To arrive at a definitive form, we remain dependent on the laws and regulations in the country concerned. We will continue to publish about this and share our experiences.
The next part of this blog article is about blockchain technology, (sub)networks, and crypto tokens.
Part 2 Blockchain and Crypto
Are Blockchain Technology and Crypto Tokens Necessary?
The question will always be asked whether blockchain technology and crypto tokens are necessary to realize this project. The project relies on blockchain as an infrastructure to ensure absolute transparency and independence for all participants. The initiators are convinced that there is no better way to implement the project than by using blockchain technology and crypto tokens.
When we talk about Blockchain, we mean an automatic, decentralized, and secure system for gaining and giving trust. Trust what is based on Distributed Ledger Technology, i.e., on a registry distributed across the various network nodes and structured as an immutable Blockchain. The distributed network of nodes also verifies transactions through a process known as Mining for a Proof of Work (POW) protocol and Validating for Proof of Stake (POS) protocol making the Blockchain technology a Trustless (Trustless) system.
With blockchain, the transaction history is permanently recorded and available to the user. Once registered and validated in a ledger, the data cannot be changed; blockchain does not allow changing or deleting information. This is crucial for all users of the network but also any third parties. Consider government agencies a user may have to deal with and possibly institutions in the traditional financial world (TradFi), such as banks and insurance companies.
The project develops an extensive network of users who form sub-networks. Everyone within those networks must be able to rely on each other without abusing individuals or networks. The users are independent of one or more individuals (intermediaries); therefore, a high level of fairness remains between all players in this extensive network; small or big doesn’t matter anymore. That is why blockchain is needed, not as a stand-alone network but as the infrastructure that connects all sub-networks and allows them to communicate.
Therefore, the project needs blockchain as a critical component for successfully implementing the whole. All networks are communities of individuals connected for one reason or another. They are communities with and without physical geographic boundaries. The overall project has no geographic footprint, as anyone can decide to be part of the main network, the main chain of the blockchain network, in any way they choose. The subnetworks, or side chains for the CWP, have geographic boundaries due to the characteristics of the CWP, but that does not mean that “outsiders” are excluded from interacting with those networks.
In the interaction between the members of the different sub-networks and the leading network, crypto tokens play an essential role. In addition to all the usual functions anchored in a crypto token, it also contains a means of communication between the various networks and the outside world. Within the project, each blockchain network has its token, be it the main chain or a sub-chain in the blockchain. The ideal model for this project will use the leading network (main chain) with multiple sub-networks (side chains). From the start of the project, two sub-networks will be used.
The main network is what it’s all about, the engine of the whole project. Within the main- network, we have two sub-nets; all communities and activities within the CWP are housed on a sub-net, and we also have a sub-net for gameplay and education. The specific sub-net for the CWP hosts all activities related to its members. Each region or country has its community with a corresponding token within which all activities can be developed. Each regional community token has its specific characteristics.
The community tokens can only be used within the relevant subnet and are not freely tradable outside the subnet. However, the various community tokens are freely exchangeable for other community tokens. This simplifies purchasing products and services from different communities within the CWP Network. The prize value of a community token is related to the fiat currency value of the country where the community has its physical footprint. For example, from the beginning of the CWP, this community token is valued at 1,000 Indonesian Rupiah. The founders have chosen this to allow users to get used to and accept it more quickly. In Egypt, where the project will establish the first land foundation, the community token will have the same value as the local currency one-to-one.
The most significant change from the original plans
With the above, we immediately come to one of the most significant changes from the original plan, from one to multiple crypto tokens. Initially, the intention was to work with one crypto token and teach the users how to deal with blockchain and crypto. But the biggest obstacle was the valuation of the tokens because working with one token creates the possibility that the allocation of tokens, especially in quantity and value, becomes unbalanced with what previous members have received.
Another advantage of working with multiple tokens is that the tokens also reflect a specific identity. Not an individual identity but a group or community identity. Because the users have access to different tokens, it is immediately apparent in which community the relevant activities occur. This can undoubtedly increase the involvement of the users in their respective communities. In addition, it makes clear what a token can be used for. While the various community tokens will mainly be a means of payment and usage, the Utility-token is mainly the token that guarantees the stability of the whole project and can be seen as a store of value.
The project has multiple user groups that want to pursue their objectives; if we separate them, the interests of the groups won’t conflict, and the group dynamic may be protected. Through the CWP, we have a group that becomes the native users of the entire network. In addition, we have a group that makes the whole project possible and mainly benefits from the stability of the system and the further growth of the possibilities and user groups. Let’s distinguish the groups and outline their objectives:
- Utility Token holders: With the purchase of tokens, the token holder provides liquidity to the system as an essential contribution to the stabilization and continuation of the project. In return, the token holders get voting rights in the policy and future development of the project. With this voting right at their disposal, token holders remain in control to prevent the evaporation of the capital base, and they will be strongly motivated to realize (controlled) project growth.
At the same time, security and decentralization will be the key components to ensure system stability. The role of token holders is decisive in this. The network of token holders maintains the nodes and plays a vital role in token staking, assuring fairness in validating transactions and creating new blocks in the chain.
- Members of the CWP: Members receive community tokens by participating in the CWP. This makes them the native users of the entire platform. Due to the objective of the CWP and the three pillars, the members naturally become the economy’s driving force within the whole project and, thus, regular users of the main network and sub-networks.
However, the economy within the project is one of many economies in which the members participate. They have one foot in the project and the other in the traditional economy of the living environment. That is one of the reasons why the project ensures that the value of the community token reflects the fiat currency in the mainstream community. This makes it relatively easy for the participants to compare the value of products and services with comparable products and services outside the project in mainstream society. This accelerates the acceptance of community tokens by the members.
The question remains, how can a system be developed in which both parties remain satisfied?
Stability seems to be the keyword, but this is more utopia than realism within the market dynamics. What we don’t influence is investor sentiment in an open market. Still, we should not blindly accept such a fact and blame the market when it shows unwanted price movements. A lot can happen during a hype. We will always have to play our part in this, never making statements about future price developments. We are not allowed to contribute to maintaining the hype. It’s not to our advantage; lows often follow highs in the markets. We should always strive for stability and transparency.
In general, what is the reason why extreme price swings often accompany crypto tokens? Imputed value over intrinsic value, the trend in the market is that speculation is mainly driven by imputed value. Because no intrinsic value can be given to a protocol or because people need to learn how to calculate it, trust is often wafer-thin. Every rumor is answered. This is not a new phenomenon; once speculators enter the commodities markets, you see this happening again and again, but also in new markets; it is a phenomenon that the market has to go through, and Blockchain and Crypto are such new markets.
The most important thing we can give to the project that can be considered intrinsic value is the number of native users. There is no doubt about this; there are more suitable candidates to join the CWP than we can ever serve, which will be fine. But how do we scale the project so it becomes a project that will make a difference? As the original plan described, with one token, this was impossible; we would depend on that token’s value to do this properly.
We propose splitting the different target groups to solve this problem. Both get their specific token; there will be a Utility token for the supporters of this project; for the participants of the CWP, there will be a community token. However, not both tokens are freely tradable. Only the Utility token is freely tradable. The community token is awarded to the members of the CWP, or one can buy the community tokens with the Utility tokens. So if non-members want to own the community token, for whatever reason, they will have to exchange Utility tokens for community tokens. The capabilities of both tokens are described below.
This token matters in this system; transaction costs can be paid with the token, and decentralization and security can be achieved by deploying these tokens. But it is also the right means for the token holders to let their voices be heard. The token holders can have a say in the policies of the platform.
Description of Utility Token:
Utility tokens are a distinct category of cryptocurrencies. Unlike coins and security tokens, utility tokens provide users with dozens of features on blockchains and dApps (decentralized applications). As smart contract blockchains like Ethereum continue to scale, more blockchain developers are issuing unique utility tokens for their Web3 projects.
Now that more cryptocurrencies are available on exchanges, many investors ask themselves, “What is a utility token?” Why is it so significant to distinguish utility tokens from other types? Are there legal implications to separating utility tokens from other crypto projects?
What is a Utility Token?
A utility token is a cryptocurrency on a smart contract blockchain that serves a specific function in a crypto project’s ecosystem. Unlike cryptos like Bitcoin (BTC), utility tokens aren’t designed to be a real-world medium of exchange. Instead, a utility token only has a use case within its respective smart contract protocol.
Most often, utility tokens aren’t mined into existence like Bitcoin or Litecoin. Instead, Web3 project leaders “pre-mine”  their utility tokens and send them to team members, early investors, and the general public.
Any crypto project can release utility tokens on a smart contract blockchain to grant users access to special features. For instance, utility tokens can be used to purchase in-game items in metaverse titles like The Sandbox. Some utility tokens like Uniswap’s UNI may grant holders voting privileges on a dApp.
The point is that utility tokens only serve a function within their respective ecosystems. While utility tokens have monetary value in the open crypto market, they aren’t trying to be a medium of exchange, an inflation hedge, or a long-term store of value. Instead, developers create utility tokens to drive growth and engagement or raise funding for their dApps.
 minting is the process of generating new coins using the proof-of-stake mechanism and adding them to circulation to be traded. More on this: https://coinmarketcap.com/alexandria/glossary/minting
What are the primary uses for utility tokens
There are dozens of possible use cases for utility tokens. A few common ways people use utility tokens include:
- Voting: Utility tokens give people the right to vote on upcoming improvement proposals on a dApp. Technically, if a utility token gives people this privilege, it’s known as a “Governance token.” While every dApp has different rules for blockchain governance, one of these tokens typically represents one vote.
- Gaming: Many blockchain-based games have utility tokens that can be used to buy in-game items like NFTs (non-fungible tokens). Also, these utility tokens often serve as a rewards mechanism in play-to-earn games like “Axie Infinity.”
- Crypto exchange perks: Some centralized crypto exchanges (CEXs) like Binance, KuCoin, and Crypto.com offer utility tokens to reward holders with perks like discounted trading rates.
- Tipping: Utility tokens may serve as a dApp’s built-in tipping mechanism. In addition to rewarding content creators, this function may influence the ranking of comments or videos on a social media dApp’s main page.
- Paying network fees: People must pay transaction fees using a smart contract blockchain’s native utility token. For instance, people who want to use a dApp on Polygon must use the MATIC token to confirm transactions.
What do ICOs have to do with Utility Tokens?
Utility tokens were only possible after the Ethereum (ETH) blockchain began operations in 2015. Ethereum was the first project to introduce smart contract functionality, which refers to coded commands that use “if/then” statements to perform automatic tasks on a blockchain. All utility tokens live on smart contract blockchains, and many of these cryptocurrencies use Ethereum token standards like ERC-20.
While utility tokens were around before the 2017 bull run, they gained mainstream prominence during the “ICO craze” of 2017-2018. During this time, hundreds of new Web3 projects began offering initial coin offerings (ICOs) to investors to raise funds.
Many of these ICO companies claimed they were selling their “utility tokens” to early investors. However, in reality, most of these tech start-ups had no intention of providing token holders with utility. Indeed, developers typically used the “utility token” label to evade sanctions from the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).
As authorities caught wind of the many scams in the ICO space, they began drawing more precise distinctions between utility- and security tokens. To qualify as a utility token, a cryptocurrency must provide a viable use case beyond mere speculation. Valid utility tokens also can’t be connected with partial ownership in a company or third-party endeavor.
In contrast, a security token represents partial ownership in a third-party enterprise. For instance, a security token would be a token that tracks the price of Amazon’s stock. Also, innovative trading platforms offer security tokens representing partial real estate ownership.
Since security tokens are defined as “securities,” they must register with the SEC. Utility tokens, however, don’t need SEC approval to list on crypto exchanges.
Governance Token vs. Utility Token
A governance token is a utility token that allows investors to vote on proposed changes to a dApp. Developers usually publish improvement proposals in a smart contract and let the community vote by staking their governance tokens. Once the voting period ends, the smart contract automatically tallies the vote and records the results on the blockchain.
Other than voting rights, governance tokens share other utility tokens’ traits. Indeed, most governance tokens have many non-governance-related uses in DeFi. For example, people who hold Uniswap’s UNI tokens can lock them into a liquidity pool and earn a percentage of transaction fees.
All governance tokens are utility tokens, but not all utility tokens are governance tokens. If a utility token doesn’t give holders a say in blockchain governance, it’s not a governance token.
Is Bitcoin a Utility Token?
Bitcoin isn’t a utility token. In fact, Bitcoin isn’t a “token” at all.
The term “token” only refers to a digital asset created for a Web3 project on a pre-existing blockchain. In contrast, “coins” are cryptocurrencies native to their blockchain and function as a medium of exchange. Other prominent “coins” in cryptocurrency include Litecoin, Dogecoin, and Bitcoin Cash.
The SEC and the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) have repeatedly said Bitcoin is a commodity. Therefore, Bitcoin falls under the CFTC’s jurisdiction.
Are NFTs Utility Tokens?
Although many NFTs are no more than digital collectibles, more creators are adding use cases to their NFT collections. Yuga Labs’ Bored Ape Yacht Club (BAYC) NFTs granted holders access to VIP events like “Ape Fest” and members-only websites like “The Bathroom.” As the BAYC grew, Yuga Labs offered valuable crypto airdrops like Mutant Serum NFTs and APE tokens to people who held their BAYC NFTs.
There are also many companies and celebrities experimenting with high-utility NFTs. For example, the Kings of Leon was the first band to release a new album as an NFT. This band also released special “ticket” NFTs that grant holders access to VIP concerts.
Although NFTs aren’t inherently utility tokens, developers can find applications.
Utility Token examples
To better understand what sets utility tokens apart from other cryptocurrencies, it can be helpful to run through a few examples:
- Smooth Love Potion (SLP): SLP is a central utility token in Axie Infinity. Players can earn SLP tokens for winning battles and completing quests with their animated “Axie” monsters. Gamers can also use their SLP tokens for breeding or leveling up their Axie NFTs.
- LINK: Built on Ethereum, Chainlink is the largest decentralized blockchain oracle. Anyone using Chainlink’s Oracle services must pay transaction fees with its ERC-20 LINK token. These LINK tokens also serve as a rewards mechanism for Chainlink’s node operators.
- BNB Coin: Released by the CEX Binance, the BNB Coin initially gave Binance customers discounts on trading fees. However, now that Binance created its BNB Smart Chain, people can also use the BNB Coin to pay for gas fees on dApps like PancakeSwap.
- Basic Attention Token (BAT): BAT is an ERC-20 cryptocurrency on the dApp-friendly Brave Browser. The Brave team wants to use BAT to revolutionize online ad incentives. Brave users can sign up for BAT rewards and receive monthly payouts depending on how many ads they view. People can also use their BAT to tip advertisers they like.
While investors can buy utility tokens for price speculation, it’s not the purpose of these cryptocurrencies. Utility tokens are designed to be used on their respective protocols. From gaming and voting to tipping and transaction fees, utility tokens should always serve a function in their expanding Web3 ecosystem. 
Why a Utility token for this project? Because this token will not simply have to take on one role but has to serve multiple functions. This is a token that its versatility in use will characterize. This token will build bridges between the different communities and their use of the subnet and activities on the main net. The utility token’s role is primarily the token that takes care of the transaction costs. With this token, all transaction costs for the entire network can be covered. At the same time, this token will reward those who validate transactions, provide the network with stability and security, and provide the desired decentralization.
One of the many reward functions housed in this token is influencing the project’s future. This token will also serve as a reward function for those who help develop applications and thus increase the user-friendliness of the project. Then we need to mention another role that comes with owning this token. We have already said that the token will reward everyone contributing to the project and the applications. But the importance of the token is much greater. Anyone who owns this token at any point has a role in the project.
Whether it is someone purchasing the token and seeking speculative purposes for it in a DEX outside the project, the role it serves the project is that of liquidity. If the liquidity is in balance, this ensures the project’s attractiveness. Suppose someone uses that token as a store of value and stores this token in, for example, a hard-wallet or cold storage. In that case, that person deprives the project of volatility and thus ensures a more stable price value of the token, which can be anticipated in the longer term.
Token staking plays a vital role in the project. The token can be used in staking for transaction validation, staking for liquidity, or depositing for voting rights. It doesn’t matter much what the purpose of the staking will be; everything will impact the project’s success. Most importantly, they should feel comfortable with whatever role a person takes.
 This description of Utility tokens comes from the following article: https://worldcoin.org/articles/what-is-a-utility-token
We opt for an unusual solution here with the choice of a community token. Community tokens are a form of social tokens, although our token, in its pure form, will become an actual community token. It took a lot of thinking and resilience to come to this solution. In retrospect, we are happy with the possibilities this can bring. We recommend reading this article to understand social tokens’ different forms and capabilities.
The members of the CWP are allocated an X number of tokens at the start. The currency value of the Community Token will bear some recognizable resemblance to, although not necessarily a direct reflection of, the locally used fiat currency. Take Indonesia as an example; the value of the local community token is set to 1 community token / 1,000 Indonesian rupiah.   We base the value of the community token on the value of the local currency because the members of the CWP all live in an area where that specific fiat currency is used in everyday situations outside of the CWP. This will strengthen the acceptance of the community token. This is not so much applicable to non-CWP-related users of the token, but they will likely use the token to purchase products and services from that region. These products and services are produced locally, so using the local community token for transactions makes economic sense.
The Community Token is only circulated within the CWP subnet; when a transaction occurs outside this network, the community token must be exchanged for the Utility-token. Suppose a member wants to withdraw some funds from their credit reserve and convert these tokens into local fiat currency. In that case, the community tokens will be exchanged for Utility-tokens, which can be exchanged in the desired fiat currency. Or, one of the members wants to transfer to their credit reserve, but they need community tokens at their disposal. In that case, they must first have Utility-tokens purchase community tokens to complete the transaction to their credit reserve. Activities within the “job bank” are paid for in community tokens. The work provider must first have Utility-tokens to purchase community tokens to spend on the job performance.
The community token can be used for multiple purposes; the community token can be used in marketing campaigns for community-related activities. It is an excellent resource for various loyalty programs to reward community members for services rendered and loyalty to the system and project. Of course, the token is also the means of transaction for the marketplace and other ways of interacting with the outside world. And there are many more things the community token can be used for. But above all, the community token is the token on which the community economy runs. Without a thriving economy, community cohesion will rapidly decline. The community token is the most suitable means to engage and connect everyone within the community, with no laggards, all winners, and moving towards greater equality.
Above, we explicitly wrote the entire community, not only the community in which the CWP is rolled out but also the community of Utility-token holders. Both groups will use the community token’s capabilities in an ideal world. The project is more than just the CWP and the opportunities available to its members. It is also the business activities that are part of the whole project to be the first to generate the cash that the CWP needs for its members. The products we will produce within those activities are products everyone can benefit from.
Then there is another aspect of community tokens that is little discussed as it can have positive and negative aspects. That is the form of identity associated with the community token. A community token is not resistant to censorship. Everyone immediately knows which community someone belongs to if they wish to receive specific community tokens for whatever reason. In the interaction between the different communities, situations can arise where one community no longer wants to engage in activities with the other; this can be achieved simply by banning a specific community token. An unlawful act by one of the community members can have negative consequences for all members. This is one of the reasons why we want sizable communities, communities shaped by the same community token.
 It is a long-time discussion in Indonesia to do so: https://www.reuters.com/article/indonesia-rupiah-idUKL4N1EE2UN
Token economics and distribution
This is a sensitive subject to put down on paper at this stage. We, therefore, request that you do not take this subject as a dictate; it will remain a discussion until we program the tokens in a smart contract and register them on the blockchain or sub-net, and they become usable by anyone. However, we have to start somewhere, and after many calculations, we have arrived at the following figures that we can work with.
Details on Utility Tokenomics
The Utility token has a maximum supply of 1,260,000,000 (one billion two hundred and sixty million) tokens. The first block will contain 420,000,000 (four hundred and twenty million). These tokens have a destination; only some of the range will be intended for the general public. This project differs from many other blockchain projects in that it will have an existing user base from the beginning of the project. A significant part of the tokens will be used for this purpose.
Looking at the maximum supply, the Utility-tokens will be awarded as follows:
However, this amount of tokens is not allocated directly. One-third of all tokens are released from the start of the blockchain project. But ultimately, this will be the allocation and distribution of the tokens. Each component also has a different purpose for using the tokens. As the name suggests, the tokens in Funding 1 to 3 are sold directly to the public in three rounds. The first round is also referred to as a pre-financing or seed round. Fifty percent of the proceeds from each round go directly to the CWP to onboard members. Therefore, these resources intended for the CWP may not be spent on operational costs. The other half of the available resources will be used for further project development.
Then a significant part of the tokens will remain available in a reserve pool, which will not be allocated in one transaction. Five percent of the total will become available from the reserve pool every 365 days. This is, therefore, not 20 transactions over 20 years, but every year the reserve has a new total, and 5% of this total will be newly released. Of this, a majority (60%) of the tokens are intended for the protocol treasury, from which validators and delegators are reimbursed for the services they provide.
The distribution of the tokens of the annual mint block will be as follows:
Before continuing to explain the allocation and distribution of tokens, we need to clarify a few supply terminology:
The best approximation of the maximum amount of coins that will ever exist in the cryptocurrency’s lifetime. 
What Is Max Supply?
Max supply is the best approximation of the maximum amount of coins that will ever exist in the cryptocurrency’s lifetime. Once the maximum supply is exhausted, no new coins or tokens will be produced or mined.
Usually, the maximum supply is determined by the limits outlined by each underlying protocol of every digital asset. In the case of Bitcoin, the maximum supply is fixed at 21 million coins. Not all cryptocurrencies have a predetermined fixed supply, and one of them is Ethereum.
Maximum supply is a different concept from total supply. Maximum supply is calculated by adding the total amount of coins that have been mined with those that are yet to be mined. In contrast, total supply is calculated by subtracting the number of coins that have been lost from the amount that has been mined.
Types of Maximum Supply in Crypto
There are different types of maximum supply:
- Fixed max supply: It is the most common type implemented in most cryptocurrencies. Regardless of demand, a predetermined number of coins can never be increased or decreased. Bitcoin is an example.
- Deflationary max supply: A deflationary maximum supply is designed to decrease over time. This supply type is usually implemented in cryptocurrencies to reduce inflation and boost scarcity. Ethereum hopes to become a deflationary max supply coin.
- Dynamic max supply: A dynamic maximum supply is one that changes according to predetermined parameters, such as supply, demand and inflation. This supply type is designed to be more flexible and adaptive to market conditions.
- No max supply: Some cryptocurrencies have no maximum supply, meaning the number of coins can increase indefinitely. This type of supply is often seen in utility tokens, where the supply is not limited by the number of coins but by the number of users.
The total amount of coins in existence right now, minus any coins that have been verifiably burned. 
What Is Total Supply?
The total supply metric reflects the coins already created or mined. Not all coins included in this metric are available for use, and coins that have been burned are not included.
Circulating supply rather than total supply is used to calculate the market capitalization of a cryptocurrency. Total supply contrasts with circulating supply, which calculates all tokens or coins that have been mined and can be used. It excludes coins that can be created but are yet to do so. The former is usually more reflective, as cryptocurrency prices are commonly affected by coins and tokens that can be used rather than those that are inaccessible.
Total supply includes coins locked due to either pre-mined coins intentionally kept out of circulation or tokens locked in smart contracts. Tokens can be locked in smart contracts until a particular purpose has been achieved, such as some stages of an ICO of a specific cryptocurrency.
Total supply can be an essential indicator of a cryptocurrency’s profitability and whether investors should invest in a virtual currency. For example, a large gap between the circulating and total supply can affect future profitability. Many tokens set to come to the market can exert downward pressure on cryptocurrency prices.
Total supply cannot be used to determine the maximum number of tokens or coins that can ever be mined. In the case of BTC, the maximum amount that can ever be created is capped at 21 million, although it is estimated that around four million BTC are missing or considered “lost”.
The best approximation of the number of circulating coins in the market and the general public’s hands. 
 The original can be read here: https://coinmarketcap.com/alexandria/glossary/circulating-supply
What Is Circulating Supply?
The amount of cryptocurrency coins or tokens in circulation is a fluctuating value that can increase and/or decrease over time. If a cryptocurrency is mineable, new coins can be created gradually via mining. In the case of a centralized token, the supply can be increased by the developers at will via instantaneous minting.
The supply can also go down: either deliberately via burning or as a result of accidents, like sending coins to an irrecoverable address or losing access to a wallet where funds are stored. The network at large has no reliable knowledge of how much of the total supply is in active circulation, making the metric of circulating supply an imperfect approximation.
For example, even though nominally the circulating supply of Bitcoin (BTC) should be over 18 million coins — as that is how many Bitcoin have been mined since the network’s inception — it is estimated that around 4 million BTC have been permanently lost, placing the true circulating supply closer to 14 million.
Circulating supply should not be confused with total supply, which is the number of coins that have been mined so far minus all the coins that have been knowingly burned, and the maximum supply, which is the hard-coded limit that neither total nor circulating supply can ever exceed.
Now that these concepts are clear, we can continue explaining the allocation and distribution of the tokens. The first block contains 420,000,000 tokens but is split between different purposes. Of these tokens, 27% will be offered to the public in three phases. That is 9 percent of the “Maximum supply”. The “Circulating Supply”, therefore, consists of 3% of the “Maximum Supply” in phase one, another 2% is added in phase two, and this is completed with 4% of the “Maximum Supply” in the third phase. No other tokens can be offered to the public during these phases; therefore, the other tokens are not part of the “Circulating Supply”. Still, the total number of tokens (420,000,000) together form the “Total Supply”. Therefore, the “Circulating Supply” will amount to 113,400,000 tokens in the third phase.
 The original can be read here: https://coinmarketcap.com/alexandria/glossary/max-supply
 The original can be read here: https://coinmarketcap.com/alexandria/glossary/total-supply
 The original can be read here: https://coinmarketcap.com/alexandria/glossary/circulating-supply
The tokens are distributed among different vaults; each vault serves a purpose. First, let’s define these goals and why they need tokens:
This Treasury is mainly used to reimburse the services of Validators and Delegators. They are crucial to the protocol and processing of all transactions. Proof of Stake is a protocol where the node operators risk financial value to perform reliably. The node operator and validator must deposit a certain amount of money to prove they are acting in all honesty; if they fail to do so or act negligently, they risk the deposit and have to stop their services to the system.
Will it be logical or normal that they are compensated for this? They provide computing power, storage capacity, and transaction speed and put their financial value at stake. It is justified as they are vital in decentralizing the blockchain network and ensuring that transactions are processed quickly and accurately.
40% of all available tokens have been allocated for this purpose. However, everyone must understand that this is not an almost infinite amount. Any token paid out from this treasury will not return to the vault. So, how do we ensure this vault is not immediately emptied to satisfy the node operators, validators, and delegators right now? The network must also function transparently and securely for a hundred years, two hundred years, and much longer. We are not politicians who only have to govern as long as their mandate is valid. We, the founders of this project, are obliged to develop a stable and reliable system that is infinite.
It is a balancing act that we must undergo here; we ask the node operators to put money on the line so that we, the users, can gain trust in the system. But does that mean trusting the system can only be achieved through financial reward? We expect this to be a discussion as long as the project is operational. However, more is needed to answer how much someone must earn to give confidence to the system. Does that calculation also include compensation for the financial value at stake for the service provider?
It isn’t a subject to be discussed any further in this document at this place; it may be a topic for the next blog article. The protocol treasury that matters is, therefore, one of the recipients of the tokens. We hope to have a healthy discussion with the Utility token holders.
It is, of course, to expect the CWP to receive tokens. At its basis, the CWP is the main driving force behind the creation and development of the project. The CWP treasury is the second-largest recipient of the tokens. Twenty-one percent of all tokens (264,600,000 Utility Tokens) are allocated to the CWP treasury. These tokens are not given away to new members. The bulk of these tokens will provide liquidity for the various trading platforms. New members will cause increased pressure on these platforms at the start of participation; to ensure that everything runs smoothly, this pressure must be absorbed somewhere.
You don’t have to pull out the calculators and calculate what this will do to a few thousand new members annually but think what the pressure will be when three- or four- and maybe even five hundred thousand every year are added. It shouldn’t have to be a question if the system can handle this; instead, the system needs to be prepared for all eventualities so that the project is guaranteed to take that pressure; then, we never have to answer that question. Giving away tokens is, therefore, not a solution; the treasury must ensure that these tokens are used effectively.
Using tokens for the system to operate effectively is one of many jobs of the CWP treasury; they will also have to redeem tokens to continue funding the entire operation. In addition, the CWP also wants to expand abroad, something that is almost necessary. However, there is a danger involved here, the more extensive the network of the CWP becomes and the further it is spread, the greater the susceptibility to fraud. This risk must be covered in some way. A system will have to be developed whereby the tokens from the treasury can be used effectively. The treasury has the tokens; an operator needs tokens to guarantee that his community does everything correctly and ensures fairness. When that fairness is compromised, this can have very negative financial consequences. The blockchain network is an excellent example of this, building a system that guarantees trust in a way as the system of node operators works. There are ideas on deploying the tokens for this goal effectively, but it is better to elaborate on this topic in another blog.
The third largest recipient of tokens. Twelve percent of all tokens are allocated to this treasury. Later in this document, the importance of this department within the whole project will be explained. This component will benefit the economics of the project if appropriately managed. This part brings all the building blocks together, it will not have the luster of the CWP that will offer an unprecedented stream of user activity, and it will not or hardly be involved in the development of the blockchain applications. But with a well-functioning Business Development department, pillar 2 of the CWP will shine, and everyone will understand why we designed the program this way. You can read more about this in the chapter on the Business Development Fund, which will be discussed later.
This foundation has nothing to do with the CWP and was created exclusively for all technological developments in blockchain and crypto. The foundation will represent the token holders and all other stakeholders and protect their interests. This foundation’s treasury will be the fourth recipient of the Utility token; they are allocated 9% of the tokens. Why should this foundation have such an emphatic allocation of tokens?
There are many reasons: one of the main ones is that the foundation is responsible for ensuring the project is always decentralized. The foundation represents all stakeholders, including by being extensively informed about all laws and regulations in the field of crypto and blockchain technology. In the background, the foundation must structure the project to grow into a decentralized autonomous organization where necessary. This also means promoting community involvement in software and hardware developments and ensuring that these developments are appropriately managed.
Founders & Staff Token Pool
As one of the last objectives, the provision will also be made for the initiators, developers, and other project team members. The tokens intended for this (4.5%) will go to more than just the initiators. The vast majority will end up in a pool for the employees. These tokens will only be awarded if specific objectives have been achieved and the token holders approve. The objectives will be set in advance, and when all parties agree that the specific goals have been completed, the employees will receive a payment from the token pool. What they do with these tokens is up to the employee concerned to determine.
For everyone, these tokens will not be available immediately but gradually over decades. For the initiators, there will be an allocation of almost 17% (0.76% of the token supply) of the token pool, making more than 83% available for other employees. Whether this is a significant amount or not is for others to judge. Before making a judgment, know that the initiators spent more than three years of time, energy, and investment before this project came online. The initiators will not submit an invoice for all costs incurred. The initiators have fully paid all costs associated with research for the project’s feasibility; the project starts with a clean slate. In addition, they will want to remain involved in the project for as long as possible. It is ultimately up to the token holders to decide whether the initiators can continue managing the project. No position should enjoy protected status.
This wallet is for emergency backup activities. How this wallet is managed and by whom will ultimately depend on a joint decision by the token holders and stakeholders. These tokens should only be used if the blockchain network and its activities require it. This isn’t for company expenses or other peripheral matters, only protocol-necessary destinations.
Now that it’s clear what the different destinations of the token allocation are, we can continue with the topic. This topic deserves everyone’s attention; otherwise, we all could get confused. Even now that it has been determined which destinations are allocated a predetermined number of tokens, they can only trade a limited number immediately. A strict policy will be implemented in all destinations, including the project’s initiators. Only a maximum of 5% can be sold per year of the total amount of the allocated tokens.
This has been covered earlier in this chapter. Each destination gets a specific allocation, the maximum number of tokens when all tokens (1,260,000,000) have been spent. Again, this does not mean those tokens are also available. Please read Maximum Delivery, Total Delivery, and Circulation Delivery to remind you. There is a difference in what is delivered per destination and the total allocation. We refer to the allocation as a starting point of what a token vault can liquidate per period.
This is, therefore, a new maximum amount after each period of 365 days; of that total, a maximum of 5% may be traded. This measure is applied to have a manageable token flow in the system, this token flow can be calculated, and an anticipatory valuation can be tailored to this. This is, therefore, in the interest of everyone, and we hope this procedure will continue.
But a controlled token flow may cause inflation because if the market does not accept the token flow and the different destinations are still forced to continue trading tokens in the interest of the project’s further development, then this will damage the value development of the tokens. Therefore, a following protection mechanism will be built in. A trigger moment is built in that ensures that tokens are automatically withdrawn from the market. No one should worry about this, as their tokens are not confiscated. Everyone keeps their tokens as they want to.
There are two scenarios under which the trigger mentioned above can work. Outwardly they show little difference, and the result will also vary little between the two scenarios; the trajectory in the middle will cause a change in approach. The expectation is that there will be much commentary on both methods. However, this negative commentary will mainly arise outside the community and will have little effect on the stakeholders. It will be said that it is precise because of these measures that the whole project will never be decentralized because intervention by people means that things cannot be permanently implemented. But is that the case? No will be the answer because the measures we apply can be programmed very well to be included as standard in the relevant smart contracts; we will only have to make a standard smart contract model for it.
Then everyone must also be very aware of what must be achieved with the project. This project is not designed to create yet another store of value, better left to Bitcoin and its peers. We want to achieve a peer-to-peer payment system that everyone can use while parallel to that doing something substantial about the wealth gap problem for our members. There is still more than enough to be desired for anyone who only sees this as an investment project.
The thoughts behind the measure include a monetary decision measure. We do not have specific mechanisms central banks have in their tool bag, so we must be creative. We do not have or do not wish to have a money press; in the longer term, this is always a so-called “death spiral.” It is in everyone’s interest that we never use that tool; the effects on the project of using the money press are as a nuclear bomb to its economy.
Each of the six objectives gets restrictive measures imposed in which 5% of its maximum in the vault may be liquidated within 365 days. After the 365-day window has passed and tokens of that initial 5% are still available, these tokens will be automatically confiscated. In Scenario 1, the remaining tokens will be automatically burned and taken out of circulation. That means the liquidity of the targeted destination will remain. Because the 365-day period is over, a new allocation of 5% of the holdings in the specific vault will become available. This is an automated process, so no one has to worry that this process will not be given enough attention and will, therefore, not be executed. Once programmed, this process cannot simply be undone.
As described earlier, the tokens that have not been spent are automatically burned. You would think everyone would start rushing to the exit en masse just before the 365 days are finished. Then we are talking about spending the tokens in the liquid wallet. People might think spending it is better; otherwise, the tokens can be lost. That is a wrong approach and completely unnecessary; that is selfish thinking because it will harm the entire system. Yes, the tokens are gone and will no longer be available. But that also means that tokens are deducted from the total because the burned tokens are no longer in circulation. The total supply will adjust downwards when tokens are taken out of circulation. Nothing changes to the maximum supply; there will always be at most 1,260,000,000 in circulation. So if the tokens that are burned are again added to the total available for minting, then that 5% in token numbers will also be adjusted. It is then not a linear delivery of 5% every year. Therefore, each treasury has a refreshed new number of tokens available for use, whereby the total number of tokens gradually deteriorate.
This means that tokens will be minted yearly from the maximum unissued supply. The first block minted will contain one-third (420,000,000) of the total, whereas subsequent minting blocks contain 5% of the “new” available total. The revised total is inclusive of the amount of the previous token burning. All this has no direct influence on the total supply, which is easy to calculate. But it will have an immediate deflationary effect on the circulating supply of tokens.
This scenario differs from the previous scenario in that tokens will not be minted every 365 days. All tokens are minted in 1 transaction. After that, the tokens go to a holding facility for everyone’s specific treasury vault, and only the liquid part (the annual 5%) is immediately available in a hard wallet or similar. The confiscation process continues; only the tokens are not burned; the removed tokens go to a shared wallet. These tokens will be added to the maximum unspent supply. After which, the standard allocation process will take place.
In summary, it comes down to the fact that tokens will be provided to the various treasury vaults. Some of those tokens are released from the vaults every year to be used. That released part is 5% of the maximum available allocation (see image …), minus the tokens effectively released per treasury earlier. When an amount of the released tokens is not spent, the non-spendable part is taken and transported to a central wallet for further distribution for a new release. In scenario 1, these tokens are burned after being confiscated. In this scenario, tokens are minted yearly based on the maximum supply. Maximum supply minus total supply after token-burning gives a new available maximum supply, of which a new minting of 5% of that available supply takes place every 365 days. In scenario 2, all tokens are available; only the part not transferred to a treasury vault remains in a storage facility and is released similarly to the token total of the mint block from the first scenario.
Regardless of the chosen scenario, there is one more deflationary measure to prevent the unnecessary distribution of tokens into the market. It has been explained before that if holders of the community token want to make transactions outside of the network, they have to exchange the community token for Utility Tokens; this also counts for those who want to make transactions that require community tokens; this relates, for example, to repayments for the loan under Pillars 1 and 2 of the CWP. As soon as someone needs to exchange Utility tokens for Community tokens, these Utility tokens will be sent to the address where the tokens that are taken in the above scenarios also go. This changes the previously given scenario in the tables to a different picture. Nothing can be said with certainty, but let’s take as an example that 25% of the annual amount of tokens that the treasuries can freely liquidate are not used, so they go to the token wallet for further treatment; scenario one lets them burn, scenario 2 send them back to the maximum unspent supply. Then it will look like this:
The first two tables represent a 5% linear decrease at each stage. This decrease does not include deflationary measures and will continue until the token holders collectively change this. Still, everyone must realize that any change will change the face of the project because a change will mean that the project is finite.
The second set of tables shows a very different picture. As indicated above the tables, this is a calculation of tokens that are allocated but not spent (25%) and therefore return to total inventory, along with Utility tokens that are exchanged for Community tokens and are taken out of circulation and later re-allocated to the Total Supply. Then a result comes out that even positively surprises us. Because if the latter model is chosen, then there is a progressive policy in circulation, which is ultimately suitable for the Utility token holders, but within which everything necessary for a healthy community economy can be financed. All these measures can be easily programmed and fully automated without the intervention of individuals.
Both models are realizable; both scenarios are scalable and can be expanded indefinitely when well worked out and not changed by their users. In doing so, we do justice to the decentralization and immutability of the blockchain-crypto philosophy. It is precisely in this way that we can realize a robust project with an unlimited lifespan. A project that will benefit everyone involved and not leave anyone out in the cold. Regardless of the chosen scenario, the second model realizes the advantages if it scales to 4 million or more members for the CWP. But that is true of any community economy; the more significant the final economy will be, the smaller the risks of adverse impacts as long as the macroeconomics of the whole community is not weighed down by external financing burdens to keep that economy going. But this model is based precisely on the fact that the community takes care of itself and its funding from within, bears the burden and reaps the benefits together.
With those last words: “But this model is based precisely on the fact that the community takes care of itself and its funding from within, bears the burden, and reaps the benefits together.”, we immediately move on to the next topic. How is the funding structured?
Funding through financing rounds is discussed several times; the money obtained from investors is entirely spent on three components:
- The CWP – Half of the proceeds from each funding round will go directly to the CWP, which grants new members access to the program. Please note that the tokens members receive are Community tokens, not Utility tokens. Members can’t spend the Community tokens outside the platform. Therefore, the program must also provide its members with sufficient cash in fiat currency. The members will not receive the money directly but must exchange Community tokens for Utility tokens and sell these Utility tokens to obtain fiat money. However, to avoid disrupting the market too much at once, the members can exchange their Utility tokens for fiat money at the DEX-AMM. At least two-thirds of the personal credit reserve is held in cash. We hope to reduce this to 50% in the short term and up to a third in fiat money in the longer term. But to ensure that everyone understands this well, these amounts of money don’t have to be held for an extended period to distribute directly to members. We need these cash funds in reserves to ensure sufficient liquidity for exchanging the Utility tokens. For that reason, the CWP treasury will control one or more liquidity pools.
- Development of the blockchain and crypto tokens – The proceeds from the funding cover the costs associated with the development of the blockchain and crypto tokens. An exact percentage cannot be linked to this, but we try to ensure that this is at most 10% of the proceeds from the funding. Personnel costs are not included; these are for the account of P.T. Emas Cemerlang Bersama. The company will cover any additional fees for the project.
- Direct investments in companies – We want to invest in companies in the sectors of Food & Beverage, Garment and Textile production, Health & Skincare, and Agriculture – Fruit & Vegetables. We will only invest in manufacturing companies, not a direct investment in the services sector; if we invest in the services sector, there will have to be cohesion in some areas with other companies in the portfolio. In addition, we only want to invest in companies where we can build up a majority interest (possibly in the long term).
With the last point, we also discuss creating intrinsic value for the project. This is an important topic, as we expect it to provide a solid foundation for the project. The CWP is one such project that, if you don’t pay close attention to it, there will always be a lack of cash flow. You could solve this by continuously raising money. But we want to avoid placing such a burden on the shoulders of token holders and investors. This is not a one-time problem, especially as we continue to grow and add more members to the CWP and expand to other countries. So we need to provide a better solution.
Business Development Fund
As described earlier, 25,5% of the tokens are destined for the CWP; from that, 21% will go into the trust, and 4.5% will be offered during the funding rounds. Half of the funding proceeds will flow directly into the CWP in cash, giving the first members access to the CWP program. Another significant portion of the available tokens is earmarked for a Business Development Fund (BDF). This is the section that will be covered here. As is also the case for the CWP, the BDF will be housed in a Foundation. The BDF is allocated 12% of the tokens. The BDF must participate in companies or finance new projects (venture capital).
The BDF will have an entity structure of a foundation. This foundation will be set up similarly to the foundation of the CWP. There will be a full Executive Board, including the Supervisory Board. The foundation will make investments on behalf of the project, in what kind of legal construction will be decided later when it becomes relevant. This will depend on the sector it will be in and the investment parameters concerned. The shares of the companies in which investments will be made will become the foundation’s property. Any profit or dividend payments thus fall entirely to the foundation and the project.
No individual will share in any profit or dividend distribution as long as the investment is made solely from the resources of the BDF. Let it be clear that this concerns investments made from the financial resources of the BDF; if someone invests in the same company in addition to the BDF, then the individual concerned is entitled to a profit distribution for the interest of participation in the company in question. However, there are exceptions to this rule; only with explicit members’ permission is it allowed for employees of the BDF to invest in a personal capacity in companies that are part of the portfolio of the BDF.
The objective of the BDF is twofold. First, the BDF must fully support the project and the CWP; the BDF will have to make investments with a profit motive, which will benefit the CWP and the project. The CWP is a very capital-intensive project; the BDF will contribute to the capital distribution for the CWP. The second role the BDF has to take is a supporting role for the CWP, focused on pillar 2 of the CWP program. The CWP can prepare risk analysis for loan applications. It can set up an incubator program where the relevant entrepreneurs are guided in starting a business plan. If the entrepreneur’s idea is approved, the BDF can guarantee financing. This applies to both sides of the investment, providing a guarantee to the relevant investor for financing the plan and to the members of the CWP based on the investment.
The emphasis on investment will be on the production of goods. However, there will be no significant investment in mass production facilities. The founders strongly believe in production close to the consumer instead of centrally controlled production. There has long been a trend of decreasing distribution costs, but that trend is quickly reversing, so we need to be aware that we are not shipping unnecessary amounts of water and air.
We try to develop a user community; how can we best serve users during community development? Data collection is the answer; ultimately, the community’s greatest strength will be that we are all consumers. By that, we don’t mean that we want to force the products on the members of the community, but the community is diverse enough to get a clear picture of consumers’ needs. The community is also a perfect testing ground to ensure we present a better product. In the end, we are all users. Why not ask the community what they need or use daily?
So instead of pumping unnecessarily large sums of money into centrally controlled mass production facilities, we should first invest in product development. Once those products are developed, the power of the community can be harnessed again by allowing the community to take responsibility for production. After all, we have the investment power to help them with that. We have the in-house product knowledge, marketing, etc., to make this a success. Community support will not be lacking; we are in it together, doing it together, and benefiting from it.
We cannot develop and produce every product; the same counts: not all people are customers. So the focus will have to be on a few sectors and a specific product range. Once we have identified those factors, we must ensure that we manage them so that it is relatively easy to anticipate changing market sentiments. Master your product. With the community’s help, we will consistently achieve positive results. We are developing an economy that can work for the benefit of the community, a model that can eventually be exported outside.
Production is the basis of a healthy economy; an economy without production or an economy with decreasing production, that economy is doomed to fail. Production is also relatively simple; there will be an investment in product development, then production will have to be started, but then intensive investment will cease; it is only the regular maintenance of the production and supply chain where money will circulate. So production has a limited investing period but an almost infinite profit period, time-based investment combined with limitless profitability. Everything is relative. The profits can be considered minimal because production is a margin business. But that is why we must also continue to invest in data collection and processing for product knowledge, marketing and product placement, and product development.
Then you may wonder what the benefit is for the network and the broader community if we don’t take on the production ourselves. Once we have fully taken care of product development and we will provide market-related data, we can introduce a royalty-based production model to the community. These royalties are the desired income for the CWP and the further project. Then it must be determined which sectors will be chosen to develop products. It will be better for this project to focus on everyday consumer goods, not luxury goods. We suggest that the following sectors deserve this attention.
- Food & Beverage
- Garment & Textile
- Health & Skin Care
- Fruit & Vegetables
A model that is most suitable for a specific product type will be chosen. The emphasis will be on research and product development. Synergy benefits will have to be gained from a diversified portfolio, so a centrally managed product and market research department should be set up; the different sectors can benefit from each other’s experiences, for example, in the distribution and stock management field of raw materials. More importantly, there is strength to be gained from the involvement of the entire community. Collaboration between CWP and BDF should be encouraged as much as possible. The CWP and the BDF can strategically expand to other regions, countries, or continents. For example, if seeking knowledge in a particular area for production is necessary, the CWP can be an excellent angle to gain a foothold. Or the CWP can be a good motivation to bind labor to a particular company. In all cases, we will need to continue to make full use of the strategic efforts of both departments.
Everything should strengthen the whole community, not just part of the project or a limited number of community members. There is much more to be gained than a good return on investment. The project takes the first step in this direction; the project ensures that a good economic situation is created for all members. Then it is not only about financial gain but also about knowledge transfer in financial planning and the possibilities of blockchain technology and crypto tokens. To achieve this, all members must ensure that suitable applications are developed for the blockchain networks so that community members can become less dependent on third-party products and applications outside the community. The CWP makes an essential contribution to this.
It would be banal if we only talked about economics and money here, but they are crucial factors for a strong community. Then we must provide a safe environment where these factors play a natural role without requiring the members’ full attention. Every community member should be able to find something that could personally benefit them. The BDF contributes to this in various ways; in addition to a stable financial base, it employs the community and shares investment opportunities with its members.
One of the scenarios in which the BDF can operate is an investment in a listed company that has a solid connection to one or more of the sectors outlined above. This should be done by acquiring the most shares without delisting the company. An acquisition as such can bring several benefits; a significant advantage is the high degree of transparency it offers. When this happens, we will list all the pros and cons and share them with the community members.
There is much more to tell about all the possibilities the BDF offers, but that deserves more attention in a separate blog post.
Tokenomics for the Community Token
The members of the CWP will mainly use the community token; this is the token they will receive when participating in the CWP. Because the members of the CWP are all assigned the community token, the usage intensity of this target group will form the heart of the blockchain possibilities. It will primarily be a user token, not directly a means of storing value. The users of the token become recurring users, with usage intensity increasing when the users get more applications available.
It will also be a token to which conditions can be attached if the members are assigned the token. The circulation of the token will be determined by an algorithm that can give the token a relatively stable price value. Still, it will not be “Stablecoin” in the usual sense. But because it will become a user’s tool, users will mainly benefit from stability. It is not in the project’s best interest to peg the token’s price against a particular fixed value of the fiat currency it reflects. In fact, by not doing so, we have resources in our hands to better serve the user and steer the token’s price in the user’s favor.
There are plenty of examples where sticking a peg to another currency can significantly damage the economy serving that currency; we are talking about the currency that establishes the peg, not the currency it is pegged to. Here are the main disadvantages of a peg:
- Erodes purchasing power, when pegged too low
- Creates trade deficits when pegged too high
- Increases inflation when pegged too high
All things that will not please the largest group of users and, ultimately, the economy of the network and community. However, the initiators believe trading in community tokens should not be promoted purely for speculative reasons. So if there is talk of a peg, this will mainly be a soft peg where good arguments will be put forward to adjust the circulation of the token due to circumstances.
The initiators, therefore, propose that a kind of monetary committee be installed that, if necessary, submit to the token holders a proposal to release the peg rate of the reflective currency. Considering the interests of the largest user group, this could be, for example, if a relevant counter currency shows a substantial devaluation. What is smart at such a time? Is it to adjust the price value, or can a decision be made that the users will receive a one-off extra allocation of tokens?
What should not happen is that anticipation is based on fear; this can already be partly accommodated by the monetary committee, which must first come up with a proposal and present it to the holders of Utility tokens, after which they must vote on the matter. One will wonder why the Utility token holders should decide on this rather than the monetary committee unilaterally. Manipulation is the word for this; one or a few people may have a common reason or benefit from adjusting the token’s price. This should never be the intention; the monetary committee is, therefore, not a decision-making body but an advisory one. Then why let the holders of the Utility token make a decision? Because they are the ones who have no direct economic interest in the community token. Still, a wrong decision for the community token can have far-reaching consequences for the Utility token.
Perhaps it is precisely the Utility token holders who should ask the monetary committee for advice rather than giving it an unlimited mandate to issue an opinion on everything. There is also no immediate need to burn tokens. Instead, a decision can be made to check liquidity; this can be done by using the number of exchange transactions as a guideline. When a certain amount of buy or sell orders are not fulfilled within a certain period, a decision can be made to add tokens or temporarily remove them from circulation.
The circulation will have to grow with the number of members of the CWP, they are the most active and native users, and in turn, their on-chain activity will attract other users. It will have to be a natural flow to which the amount of community tokens will be adjusted. It also affects the usage possibilities that the platform will offer. Is there an active marketplace, is the job bank explicitly used, and what other options will the platform offer? Activity involving the community tokens starts at pillar 1 of the CWP; tokens will also be issued within pillar 2, but in the end, the actual users (the Borrowers) of the tokens under pillar 2 are much smaller in numbers, so the number of transactions will also be limited compared to the activities under pillar 1. As soon as the community tokens are used, we will inform the community about the total circulation, liquidity, and price stability. Also, decisions have to be made on the exact role of the monetary committee and how voting procedures (based on the community tokens) work for the Utility token holders.
The Tokens and the specific role they have within the community – summary
The Utility Token is the primary token on which the entire project runs and gives us access to the capabilities and applications of the blockchain network on which everything runs. The Utility token is also the token that can be used as a voting right with which the holders can decide on the project’s future, stability, and usability. The Utility token is the means to maintain and guarantee decentralization. In other words, it is a token for the system, the engine’s fuel.
In addition, we would like to emphasize that the Utility token is also a means of communication with the outside world. While we wish we only needed the project’s network, that’s undoubtedly a pipe dream. The Utility token will, in any case, be the means of communication with the outside world for the members of the CWP. If they need cash in the form of fiat currency, the route is as follows; they buy the Utility tokens with the community tokens, and the Utility tokens can be sold for the desired fiat currency, and vice versa if they need to make a repayment for the credit facility they need the community token. If they only have a fiat currency, they must first purchase the Utility token to exchange it for community tokens to pay for the installment. The Utility token is the resource that connects both worlds.
Then the Community Token, as the word describes it, is the token that binds the community. The CWP gives this project its raison d’être, one would like to believe otherwise, but no other token is needed if it does not serve any purpose. In this case, it has a clear purpose; the CWP and its members. The community token allows the project to build a healthy economy for the entire community. The community is not only made up of members of the CWP because the Utility token holders also have an indispensable role in the community, so they too should benefit from the community token. The advantage lies in separating roles that both tokens fulfill within the project. The first (Utility token) keeps the system safe and sound and provides the desired stability for the project. In contrast, the other (community token) is a power source for all day-to-day operations, native users, and “guaranteed” order flow. In other words, Macroeconomics (Utility token) and Microeconomics (Community token).
For the members of the CWP, the community tokens are the means to secure a more reliable financial future. An economy is created within the community because they spend the tokens for their private use and lend them to the (local) business community. Everything is in the form of credit, which generates traffic through withdrawals and refunds. A secondary economy is created around this, where members can develop activities that provide additional financial resources for repayment. In addition, there will be a marketplace where products can be traded. Anyone can participate in that secondary economy, not just the members of the CWP, as long as everyone understands that the community token is the original means of a transaction within that secondary economy.
We enroll members in the CWP from the beginning of the project; everyone must understand that the first developments are primarily aimed at this. Simultaneously, we continue to develop blockchain applications and other project components. We will desperately need these developments to keep everything running smoothly. All development activities must serve all users. Therein lies the immediate difficulty of this task as we develop for a broad spectrum of users, from illiterate/inexperienced users to advanced/experienced users.
It is up to the experienced user group which applications they will use, for example, for managing the tokens. They can use a wide variety of options on the main network. This is especially true for the holders of Utility tokens. However, not all main net applications are suitable for use on the subnet. The subnet of the CWP must become a safe environment for the members of the CWP; in general, these are the inexperienced users, with a large proportion also, at least digitally, not advanced users.
One of the first areas of focus will be registered identity. This will not be a matter of simple registration; it deserves much more attention. The members of the CWP receive a registration account, but is this account also the online identity, or are all individual members of the household entitled to an “on-chain” identity? An even more important question will be, what does that digital identity look like, what can it be used for, and what data is registered on the chain? The founders are very much in favor of one identity for all activities, maybe not from the start, but definitely in the future. So the identity must also be usable on the main net and cross-chain on other sub-nets.
Then, let’s rediscuss the subject of family or individual identity. Initially, members of the CWP are households within a specific community. But in most cases, a household consists of several individuals. Should we stick to one identity per member (family), or should we go for one identity per individual? The discussion is ongoing on this particular topic. But an important consideration must be taken that this discussion is about identity registration on the specific CWP-related sub-net. The sub-net is not the CWP; the subnet is used for registering data and transactions, i.e., a history database. The CWP can therefore create a family account registered on the sub-net, but one account can have several users registered separately.
Why give everyone an identity if not everyone can independently complete a transaction? To answer that question, we need to look again at blockchain; it is, among other things, a decentral controlled and validated transaction history database. A transaction is not only a financial settlement; identity registration is also a transaction. Thus, participating in the CWP allows each individual to build an independent and immutable history. Suppose a household decides to take out a loan under pillar one, but only one household member will perform tasks via the job bank to repay the loan. Then it would not be fair if that history of performing paid work is not processed in the name of the individual family member, even if the result would be that the income from paid tasks is used to pay off the loan for the entire family. When the respective member decides to run a household independently, then in the case of family identity, that member would have to start again and be unable to access their personal data history.
So the CWP will handle and register household accounts on the blockchain, with each family member obtaining their identity within the blockchain network. It is up to the household in question whether they will further specify certain transactions within the CWP in the blockchain per individual family member. There are countless other examples of why letting each family member have a personal identity is wise. It will be apparent to everyone that it is not a standard fixed model that an on-chain identity must meet but that it will be a continuous development process that adapts to the possibilities that the network will offer.
This will be an information and user portal for the blockchain network and the CWP—one general user platform with two different entrances, i.e., one house with two different facades. Once inside, all members of the various communities can find each other, and everyone can configure and personalize their dashboard.
Two different entrances are used because the portal must be available to everyone, including the general public that doesn’t yet participate in one or more communities. The information provision is, therefore, for the general public, while the user applications are only accessible to participants. One portal will be developed for the different user groups because there should be as much interaction as possible between all the users. This allows one group of users to understand better the role of the other group of users in the overall project. This interaction is not critical to the project’s success but can increase user engagement.
Specific applications will be offered for the different groups, so the members of the CWP will initially find a simplified version of the entire platform. This is mainly due to a need for more experience among the members. The members of the CWP will have to follow an education program to obtain a more extensive package of applications. This education program will also be accessible to non-members. However, they will not be obligated to go through this program. What non-members of the CWP program cannot use are the specific applications required for the three pillars of the CWP. These applications can only be used with the registered identity of the members of the CWP.
Badges for individual users will be used within the web portal. These badges give access to various applications. As a result, users do not have to go through a separate login procedure for each application. Once logged in, the user profile should automatically make it clear which applications are accessible to every individual user.
The web portal will be the home base for all users, although the various applications can be operated as stand-alone apps. There are many ways to consider why the multiple functions could also be used as a stand-alone application without logging in to the web portal. An example of this is the wallet or the chat and communication function.
The functionality of the web-based portal can be enhanced by using Application Programming Interfaces (APIs). These applications can be operated directly from the web portal through an API and independent applications. In the development phase, all attention will initially be focused on the following application applications:
This is one of the most critical applications to which every blockchain user should have access. The emphasis during development will have to be on simplicity and security. All transactions can be made, and the tokens can be managed from this wallet. The wallet must be easy to use; even users who have absolutely no experience with tokens and blockchain transactions should be able to understand it.
A digital wallet with mobile-friendly usability. Every user must be able to find everything within the wallet environment to complete a transaction successfully. It should be neatly organized with accurate account details and transaction history.
If it is up to the initiators, the wallet should also become the ultimate login app for the web portal. With the possibilities a smartphone offers, it should be possible to build in various security applications, such as fingerprints, facial recognition, and multi-factor authentication.
Chat and Communication function
The initiators believe communication will contribute to a closer community. It allows Utility token holders to interact directly with CWP members and vice versa. Perhaps not from the start of the web portal, but soon, this chat and communication function will have well-known applications such as those used in, for example, WhatsApp or Signal with video and voice calling options.
It should be possible for the organization of the CWP to manage groups similar to the communities participating in the CWP. These are closed groups with access only to the members and the organization. It will be left to the group members whether they want to create other groups that allow participants outside the community.
All Chat and Communication application users will have a say in further developments of this feature. However, everyone should know that the outside public can only access this feature if they register on the web portal.
Token Exchange (DEX)
Initially, the organization will ensure that holders of the Utility token can trade their tokens on an Exchange running on the main network; this will initially be an Exchange managed by another organization; their multiple options are available once the Utility tokens are registered on the main network. Soon after, a decentralized Exchange application will be developed to be accessed directly through the project’s web portal. This should, however, not be expected from the beginning of the project.
There are plans to expand the functionality of the Exchange application, but there are other ways to further share this with a broader audience. The wishes of the token holders when using an Exchange will be carefully listened to. Each group will have to feel comfortability in using the Exchange application; in the case of this project, these are the Utility token holders and the CWP members, as the latter group needs the Utility token to possibly convert it to fiat currency if they want to make a transaction outside the project.
For the community token, there will only be a token-swap function on the sub-net; this can be a swap transaction between the various community tokens and between the Utility tokens and specific community tokens. This also applies to Utility token holders who want to perform a transaction on the sub-net, such as purchasing products or offering employment for the job bank.
On- Off-Ramp (Fiat Gateway)
This ties into the previous topic, exchanges. The initiators are well aware that all users of the blockchain and crypto also use fiat currency in their daily lives and that it will be a long time before this is no longer necessary. In many countries where the CWP will develop its activities, it will not be allowed to use crypto tokens as a universal means of payment. To increase the acceptance of the project, the project must come up with a solution.
Unfortunately, this option cannot yet be offered in a decentralized solution. Therefore, the answer must be found in a self-contained central entity. There are well-defined plans, which will be shared with the token holders in due course. The initiators believe this will contribute to the scaling of the entire project. However, before this, an agreement must be reached with the various regulatory authorities before the information can be shared with the general public.
This will be one of the projects in which the Business Development Fund will be involved. The information that can be provided is that, in this specific case, it will be a financial service provider that will operate on the dividing line between “the crypto and fiat world.” Users of this option should know that this can only happen if they are prepared to share personal- and transaction data with relevant authorities in the “fiat world.” However, blockchain solutions will also be used as much as possible where this will be allowed; in any case, all transactions will be registered and included in the blockchain. More information about this will follow later.
Gaming & Education Program
Gaming and education are two different subjects, but this will be a joint department where applications that cover both topics will be developed. The members of the CWP need to become more familiar with crypto and blockchain technology. At the same time, they form the largest and most active user group within the project. To facilitate acceptance, the organization of the CWP will have to guide and train its members explicitly. Gameplay can speed up the acceptance process.
Initially, a simulation module will be developed in which the members of the CWP can learn to deal with the blockchain and their wallet, perform transactions and manage portfolios. Modules will also be developed for managing personal financial affairs. After passing modules, participants will receive badges that give access to more possibilities within the CWP.
In addition to the educational part, a video game will also be developed where there is something for everyone. Of course, the idea for the game is based on the whole project. It cannot be categorized into one genre. It will have a sandbox environment with MMORPG features and, again, a simulation aspect. The game must align with the CWP and blockchain with a crypto economy. The game will not only be accessible to project members, but the general public can also play the video game and playfully learn more about the project.
The video game will not be developed all at once but will have continuous development to give the storyline depth. In addition, it will be great if the users contribute to creating the video game. It is the perfect opportunity to use the video game platform as a storytelling board. The initiators would like to see quests developed that connect to the CWP and blockchain.
The video game can be highly suitable to further involve the community in the project. For example, so-called “easter eggs” can be hidden in the game, which contains a reward accrues to the community that helped solve the “easter egg.” Once again, the video game will also be used to communicate to stay in touch with the community members. Both the wallet and the chat app must be usable in the game.
The initiators think it is unnecessary to develop the video game on the blockchain; it will limit the possibilities in game development and overload the traffic on the blockchain. But parts of the game will undoubtedly be compatible with the blockchain. This can be, for example, the player’s progress in the game, the points scores, and money matters that can be registered in the blockchain. Identity and possessions in the game will be recorded on the blockchain. The same goes for the quests and easter eggs. The game-specific economy can use blockchain technology as an independent and immutable data storage facility.
This opens up many possibilities for building and expanding the game’s economy. For example, the game can integrate an NFT platform. Game development can provide employment and generate income. That is why a “play-to-earn” module should become a part of the game. This module alone can form a sub-economy on its own. In addition, the game is the most preferred opportunity to let the users build an experience with what it means to create and maintain a community.
As long as it is clear to everyone that the game will take time to come to full maturity. It will take a more extended period of several years before we can speak of a fully-fledged game platform, but modules will gradually become accessible to the public.
Before closing this chapter, one more topic needs careful consideration. This project follows a different path than many predecessors in the blockchain/crypto industry had chosen. This project will not dump large numbers of tokens on the market and, after that, try to live up to expectations. Many ICOs have ended in disappointment because expectations were too high beforehand. Anyone who has ever done product development knows unexpected setbacks are always lurking. These setbacks will only create a negative market sentiment, detrimental to the token’s price development.
Below is an explanation of what can be expected from this project and at what stage:
We have listed ten steps in the table above. These ten steps can also be seen as a stage in the project’s development. At the same time, there will be developments in two areas, namely for the CWP and, of course, for the blockchain and crypto. The following is a brief explanation of the data listed in the table:
The amount that will be raised in steps one to three is already determined from the start of the project. Three different steps where an X number of tokens are offered at a predetermined valuation. Why is this not completed in one phase? The answer is straightforward: performance-driven financing applies to all project stages. What makes the first three steps unique is that 50% of the required capital will be immediately allocated to the CWP. New members are registered for the total amount intended for the CWP, who, in turn, get access to the family-related financial reserve. This is a transparent development for all stakeholders, as the organization must account for the number of members brought in before moving on to the next step.
A different procedure applies from step four onwards. From step four, each member of the CWP will be assigned a wallet with an X amount of Community tokens, and the members of the CWP will become active users of the blockchain network and web portal. Before that time, the organization of the CWP will ensure that all transactions are processed in the blockchain. However, this will parallel the fiat currency-based transactions that members will undertake within the CWP. It should be noted that we will implement this before the end of the fourth phase. This will take place irrevocably when it is possible to switch to community tokens. This also applies to all developments in all steps; if a module or application is available for general use earlier, it will be implemented immediately. The step-by-step plan should be seen as a guideline, not as a fait accompli.
Registering new members will cause even more drastic changes for the CWP in step 4. Where new members were recorded during the previous steps equal to the amount intended for the CWP, that procedure will change entirely from step 4. The exact formula cannot be shared; this is our strength for scaling the number of members of the CWP. But it is loosely based on the expected trading volume of the Utility token on the free markets. Therefore, from that moment on, the tokens that the Trust of the CWP manages will provide the necessary liquidity to promote the tokens’ trading.
Registering new members is not only an automated procedure; much of the information must be verified manually to prevent fraud or avoid it as much as possible. The numbers used as indications for signing up new members are expectations, not absolute numbers. Every time we will publish how many new members have been registered in the previous year. This number of new members can grow from 13,000 in year four to more than 500,000 new members for the CWP per year in the ninth year. These numbers can continue to be used as long as there is a need to keep the CWP open to new members. More than half a million new members yearly are not recommended; we are talking about 12,500 unique members per week for 40 weeks in a year.
From the fourth phase, the CWP must have a firm foothold in Indonesia and Egypt. The social program needs to reinforce this expansion to show that it will work in one, two, and more countries and do justice in other countries and other parts of the world. The Utility token holders can also make their voices heard in this. The initiators propose that after the fourth phase, a country will also be considered where inflation plays a very negative role in the economic situation of its citizens. Think of a country like Turkey; the citizens at the bottom of the economic ladder are hit hardest. Then let the CWP demonstrate that it can improve the members’ financial situation there. This would be the ultimate test of whether the community token works as thought, so it can be a weapon to cushion the blows of inflation in the fiat economy.
As previously reported, tokens are gradually being released for sale and financing of further developments. From the start of the project, it is established that 51% of the tokens are allocated to different parts of the project. Gradually, a percentage of these tokens will be released for sale at each stage, where the sale proceeds are intended for the relevant parts. There will be a strict policy regarding offering tokens for sale or supporting the project. Because to be clear, not all tokens are sold; a large part of the released tokens are used to ensure sufficient liquidity in the market for token trading and staking.
For the sake of clarity, the progress in the development of the project is quoted per phase:
- Phase 1 – Identity registration for the CWP and the blockchain. This could be done in a format such as ERC 725 or similar. Depends on the protocol being developed. I have included a brief explanation of ERC 725 here for you to read.  The development of the web portal speaks for itself.
- Phase 2 – The Utility tokens are distributed to the token holders from this stage. At the same time, the wallet will be active for the token holders, provided they do not have a wallet suitable for the Utility tokens. In addition, the first steps will be taken to activate applications on the main network.
- Phase 3 – The web portal must be fully activated for members during this phase. In addition, the sub-net must be started for further use. During this phase, the possibility will also be offered to trade tokens via a trading platform, such as a decentralized exchange. The community tokens are introduced.
- Phase 4 – All blockchain applications for the main network and the sub-net must be integrated within the web portal and fully available to members. The first steps must be taken to provide a solution for the on- and off-boarding of crypto tokens and fiat currencies. Within the sub-net, there must also be the possibility to perform a token swap between the various Community tokens and the Utility tokens. During this phase, the Business Development Fund will also be further activated and have to make the first contribution to the cash flow for the project.
- Phase 5 – During the fifth phase, several community tokens must be in circulation. There will also be the possibility to exchange these with each other without the costs exceeding the actual transaction costs. For example, a member who has access to community tokens in Indonesia can, from that moment on, buy products in Egypt that are offered on the marketplace without this member having to carry out complicated exchange transactions. The Egyptian provider of the products is paid directly in the Egyptian community token. From this phase onwards, the project must be fully decentralized, and there must be a clear separation between decentralized and centrally managed parts. This is also the time for the project to gain full access to its DEX. In addition, the game development subnet must be activated at this stage.
- Phase 6 – There must be an absolute separation between decentralized and centrally managed project parts. This must be done in both regulatory and financial areas. For this to happen, a completely new model of Governance code will also have to be accepted by the Utility token holders.
- Phase 7 – From this moment on, the first steps must be taken to develop an independent blockchain protocol where all activities can occur. It is not said that the transition will have to take place immediately, but the possibility must be created in case of emergencies. It is up to the total project members whether they will allow this transition.
All this is not to say that developments will come to a halt after the seventh phase, but it should become apparent from that moment what the final form of the entire project will be. Developments will never stop. As soon as further developments are regarded as a side issue, this can mean the death knell for the project.
This detailed description is a snapshot; as soon as a phase has been passed, it will be communicated what the expected developments are for the next step. The Utility token holders will have a say in the development process and can bring it forward if they have different expectations about the development order during each phase.
Summary Blockchain and Crypto
Recently, the world has experienced events that are increasing poverty. The global pandemic has again shown that enough governments cannot provide their citizens with the necessary financial backing in times of unexpected crisis. More than ever, a project like this is needed to tackle the ever-widening wealth gap. This chapter explained how blockchain networks and tokens could help us develop the project to its full potential.
The time has therefore come for citizens to take matters into their own hands and fight together with like-minded people for a more robust economic situation. The project as we have designed it will significantly contribute to this. However, this can only be done using blockchain technology and crypto tokens. Individuals can rely on the blockchain network so that their data will not be changed, that it is safe, and that they do not have to fear that it can be taken away. It enables everyone to take care of themselves without the involvement of an intermediary who determines the conditions.
To make all this possible, the project is being developed on a blockchain network that allows subnetworks to be created. Specific data can be processed here that is only accessible to the individual and does not need to be shared with the outside world. It is up to the individual when what data is shared between the sub-networks and the main network to use more facilities on the main network. Such interaction wasn’t possible before.
This project offers a user network with room for the individual, with all members building a robust network simultaneously. Various crypto tokens will be used, each fulfilling its task within the more extensive network. There is the Utility token – the token that is the great driving force behind the whole project. Ownership of this token entitles owners to have a voice in the policy and future of the entire project. In addition, this token ensures the decentralization of the blockchain network and offers security. That is why, according to the initiators of this project, it is also the ultimate system token.
This token’s involvement in the project does not end there; this token plays another essential role in the entire project. The Utility token is also the means of communication of the members for interaction with the outside world. This position will become increasingly important in the future and will therefore support the true power of this project.
In addition, members have access to community tokens. This token is the fuel for the internal economy of the project. All members get a financial reserve backed by these tokens. This reserve consists of an X number of community tokens, depending on the physical location of the community they are part of. This token circulates within the project by the members of the CWP.
Geographic borders separate local networks but will converge within the sub-network dedicated to the CWP. Each local network will eventually have its unique community token with its characteristics but are freely interchangeable within the CWP-related sub-net. As a result, the users of local networks can set up their economies that can trade with other regional economies, which will simplify transactions between them. As the project grows, the economy of all local networks will grow with it and provide a vibrant whole.
Eventually, the project will have another sub-net, purposely intended for gaming and education. This will not be in the project’s first phase, but more activities will gradually occur on this sub-net. An economy will undoubtedly be formed around these activities, but it will not be the reason why this sub-net will generate much traffic. While the first sub-net provides much-needed economic activities, this sub-net will have a more educational and social character. This will mainly occur because of the socially friendly nature where one will find a recreational and educational environment.
In short, those participating in this project will have access to a blockchain network with two sub-networks, using two crypto tokens, a freely tradable Utility Token, and a Community token for the sub-net economy. Later, a token that can only be used on the sub-net for gaming and education will be added. This ends this second part, and the next part will deal with the future as the initiators envision the project.
Part 3 The Future of the Project as we see it
Daydreaming is allowed, especially if we want to explore the project’s potential future and what it may offer us. Don’t expect a guaranteed outcome from what we predict here; a prediction for the future is never guaranteed. Ultimately, our community will steer the project in the right direction. The community will let us know what they want and how they want it. They are the users, and they need to be able to handle it. We’re here to build it and give advice to the community. We can only hope that this will be an actual community project. A community-driven project in which all those involved as individuals come first. Still, we also look at the well-being of all participants within the community. What was the phrase again: “Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.” Whether this is your physical neighbor or a digital neighbor in the global internet society should not matter with this statement.
Our community motivates us to develop this project and will always be the most significant driver. This is a long-term project, a marathon, not a sprint. Of course, we want to help as many people as possible, but there must also be a solid foundation to build on. Something we should always be aware of.
It all started with two concepts, undoubtedly adding something to the discussion about tackling the wealth gap. Those concepts have been discussed extensively, Universal Basic Income and Crypto/Blockchain. While we’ve discussed our objections to UBI in detail and highlighted what we think could be improved, this is the first time we are critical of the blockchain/crypto scene. If we understand correctly, the earlier discussions about Bitcoin are more in line with our philosophy rather than where it is going now. But Bitcoin is not alone in this; the entire crypto scene has been promising for years that it will become an anti-inflation mechanism, and that is currently difficult to sustain in the eyes of most of the public. While we firmly believe in that statement, it does not support the claim for the near future and detracts from what crypto is trying to deliver to its users. In addition, crypto promises to become more inclusive, but it mainly gives the rich among us a tool to become even more prosperous and not have to look at the neighbor who can’t keep up. What has become of the promises – “making the unbanked bankable” – to help those now excluded from the banking system?
Crypto will never become an anti-inflation mechanism that will immediately solve the problem when it arises. Crypto tokens are, among many other things, money market instruments. So, if the economies of several countries or even the global economy are hit by inflation, the value of crypto tokens will also be affected. But in the long run, crypto tokens, especially Bitcoin, are a perfect tool to fight inflation. Because, unlike the fiat money system, generally, the money press cannot be used for crypto tokens. The public must be patient and not expect immediate miracles when panic hits the financial markets. If the public maintains that trust, the value of these tokens will always remain strong.
A strong indication of intrinsic value must be added to inspire confidence. This inherent value measures the economic value associated with the token using an objective calculation or a complex financial model. Intrinsic value differs from imputed value – the current market price of a token. However, by comparing it to the imputed value, token holders can know whether the token is undervalued or overvalued. Intrinsic value can give the necessary confidence in Crypto token price valuation regardless of general financial market conditions. Due to the lack of intrinsic valuation, the price valuation of a token will always be volatile when doubt kicks in.
Unfortunately, crypto is currently very popular in the “Get-Rich-Quick” scene. If crypto is seen as the perfect tool for speculation and the public gets excited about memes, those weird price moves won’t disappear. As a token holder, you can play an essential role in this. Do your research, avoid getting caught up in the hype, and never speculate with money you can’t afford to lose. If you put your money in one basket, you should know you can lose everything. Don’t expect sympathy from the market if something like that happens to you.
We try to prevent the main shortcomings mentioned here in our way. We will never comment on future price expectations of the tokens. We will never support any price prediction. The public must judge whether our work is sufficient to maintain confidence. The lack of intrinsic value is one of the main areas for improvement. This is challenging to overcome. However, this shortcoming will be addressed in the model we choose. This is done for a reason other than intrinsic value, but it does help mitigate this problem. For example, look at the Business Development Fund.
We are not going to solve problems by throwing money at them. There are no rules because there must be rules. Giving people a certain amount every month doesn’t solve any problem; at maximum, it relieves short-term aches and pains at most. Giving people access to a significant amount of money and letting them figure it out for themselves will not improve the situation in the long run. The CWP, with its three pillars, will make a difference immediately and in the long term while also serving the community at the same time.
Okay, let’s be honest; what we are doing here is not solving the world’s poverty problem; it hardly begins to address the issues associated with the wealth gap. But what we are trying to achieve is to make all members more financially aware. We show them the possibilities of a sensible personal wealth management system. Give them access to the tools to plan a financial future for themselves and their family. Nothing is more devastating than seeing no hope of rising above a certain standard of living, no chance of anything more than dangling at the bottom of the economic ladder, and no hope of breaking out of that vicious circle. Let’s provide the tools to create that hope for future generations.
Author’s Note: Among the things that have stuck with me in my research for this project are: Maimonides (1138-1204); “Giving an interest-free loan to a person in need; forming a partnership with a person in need; giving a grant to a person in need; finding a job for a person in need; so long as that loan, grant, partnership, or job results in the person no longer living by relying upon others.”  But sure also: Lao Tzu – “If you give a hungry man a fish, you feed him for a day, but if you teach him how to fish, you feed him for a lifetime.” This quote in any form is attributed to several people; I’ve quoted this version because it is, in my opinion, the most appropriate for the project. To know more about the quote’s origin, check here. 
 Give a man a Fish, and you feed him for a Day. Teach a man to Fish, and you feed him for a lifetime: https://quoteinvestigator.com/2015/08/28/fish/#r+11878+1+15
The Future of the CWP
We want the CWP to be rolled out globally; the issues we are trying to address are not specific to Indonesia but are shared worldwide. But Indonesia is our primary market. This is where we start developing the whole project, where we live and are active in the community we serve with the CWP. In Indonesia, we collect user data that can help with global expansion. We will work with universities and colleges to collect this data and create an educational program that maximizes the benefits of participating in the program for members.
This part is about the future of CWP, which can be described in different ways. But the most interesting is to define the objective first; what are we trying to achieve? Is the goal to onboard as many members as possible? Okay, we’ve covered this before, so let’s play the numbers game. Within five years, sixty thousand and more families. Ten years, then we must have passed the million mark. But when will enough really be enough? Is four million a lot? Let’s describe this adequately. We are talking about families, or households, with a worldwide average number of persons per household at 3.69, then we are talking about more than fourteen million people that we touch with the program. Is that impressive enough?
Quantity over quality. Is it realistic to bring in four million households? Yes, that should be possible; within nine years, we can reach 500,000 new members annually. Within fifteen years, we must pass the four million mark. But it’s more than just registering new members. The project must grow with it in all directions. Above all, we need to ensure that we have a highly engaged community that understands the benefits of the overall project and is willing to go the extra mile.
What we find interesting is that with four million households, you also have more than 10 billion dollars in investment capital, which is invested by the same community in (micro) enterprises. How interesting is that? What does that mean, how many people do you reach, and what are the real effects on a community’s economy? Can we also keep those companies on board and make them part of the community of the project?
Many questions to which we would like to know the answer in advance, but reality gives these answers years later. Take the 15 years, as mentioned earlier; how do the members view the CWP when the CWP has existed for 15 years? What percentage of members drop out, do not want to participate, or do not keep to the agreements? Does it deliver the desired effects for the members? Are there any members for whom the financial situation has shown dramatic improvements? Do all three pillars contribute equally to the result? We cannot get a clear answer to all these questions in advance because no comparable data is available; this is the first time it will be done this way.
How does this program affect the mental state of the participants? Are there improvements in the participants’ physical health? We can only find out by continuing to measure things. We must formulate the questions to which we want to know the answers. But more importantly, we must ensure that the answers are not manipulated. There is only one reason why member count is so important to track. That is to balance the economy within the communities and the monetary input of the Governance token holders.
Let’s be honest; this is one big social experiment with far-reaching consequences if we don’t implement this the right way. Building a network/community with 4 to 17 million participants is relatively easy. Just look at Facebook; they laugh at these numbers. But what we do here is much more difficult. This is not just a network created by bright minds in an ivory tower; it has a physically active presence in the community. Because if we get it wrong in the field, the project will not achieve what we envision.
There will be just as much, if not much more, work to do in the field than in the office. To build such a network, well, there are already so many examples; we need to figure out what’s good, turn it into code, and implement that. But are the developers of Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, WhatsApp, or anyone else in the middle of the communities they develop for? No, and that is precisely where we can make a huge difference. Our job encompasses much more than just building an online network. We even have to work on a micro level within every network branch with every member.
Still, we must be careful, we can be the instigator and catalyst, but ultimately the network members decide how things go. Data helps with that, which applies to the CWP and everything else within the project. We are the initiators, but in the end, especially in the future, it can only succeed if the members decide where the whole project is going. Ultimately, we are at the service of the entire project; our reward is the result of the project. We can only hope that the absolute numbers don’t count. Not because it would be so difficult to realize those numbers but because a numbers game is just banal in this case.
The home base will always be Indonesia. This is where it started, and one of the initiators is Indonesian. But we hope for the broadest possible spread of the CWP, as many countries as possible in every continent. There should be a good balance and not just starting a country foundation for spreading and thus achieving expansion. The desired effect will only be achieved if enough member potential is available. A country or region should have at least a possibility of around 30,000 suitable members to get the most benefit from the CWP. We hope others will frequently copy the project because it is precise that together we can make a real difference.
We hope governments will also study our data and extract parts from it that can be used, for example, in times of emergency, a pandemic, or the like. Let us take the coals out of the fire and show what the community wants and how, for example, the activities under pillar two are picked up by a community. Because it is a powerful weapon, for example, to ease the burden on the shoulders of citizens during an economic recession if you enable those same citizens to invest in the local business community with their community jointly. But again, let’s prove it works first.
A continuing and significant focus will be community building. The stronger the communities, the more benefit the CWP will bring its members. Of course, our members have the advantage of that initial financial injection, which contributes significantly to a healthy economy for the community. But if it is executed well, the effects will also be felt outside the program. In the end, that’s what it’s all about.
The three pillars of the CWP remain essential, and nothing should change that. But the longer the members are involved with the project, we hope the emphasis will shift. Pillar one is fundamental in the beginning for several reasons; learning to master the facilities of the entire project and blockchain technology is undoubtedly one of them. However, we hope the emphasis will gradually shift to the second pillar. Members will initially want to consume under Pillar one, but because it is issued as credit, they will be confronted with such limitations. This creates the possibility that the budget of pillar one will only be used when strictly necessary and will therefore be regarded as a safety net solution. Pillar two can bring about the most significant change.
Within Pillar Two is an individual earning component, but it isn’t about the individual; the whole community will benefit from the activities within this pillar. The healthier and more stable an economy is, the more sustainable the effects will be. The collective nature of the possibilities within this pillar will contribute to a closer community. The same message is hidden in blockchain/crypto, the network is only as strong as its weakest link, but together you achieve much more. By being part of the community and working together to ensure the stability and reliability of that network, everyone can continue to grow as an individual.
Everything stands or falls with our willingness to guide and educate the members in the possibilities of the entire system. This project can become an absolute success if we are willing to adapt to the speed of acceptance and understanding of the workings of the project by the members. Therefore, we are fortunate to gradually grow the number of members, and we can always point to the successes of previous communities that have preceded new members.
It will take much time and a complete learning process in the early stages of the CWP, but we hope to automate registering new members as much as possible. Only then can we work towards a growing number of new members of 500,000 per year. To put this in numbers: 12,500 new members a week, 40 weeks a year. This is an absolute maximum. This cannot and should not be expected from the very beginning. So much work goes into making this all possible; it’s more than just building a system that can handle data flow. Such a system is relatively easy to build, even if you include the case of digital identity. New members should all register a digital identity in the blockchain, which can be used for all project parts.
Familiarizing everyone with blockchain technology and token management is a process in which we also have much to learn. Members cannot be programmed like computers, even when we might secretly want to. The security of such a complex network comes into play. How do the individual members deal with this? Enough pirates on the coast want to take advantage of this; what should we do to prevent them from abusing the system?
We ask for patience; this is not a project where we can launch stuff and see if it breaks. We have a project here where we introduce a target audience to the possibilities of blockchain and crypto tokens, expecting to use them for their good. This target group will be the native users of the platform; they have little or no experience with the technology but are almost forced to use it anyway. That is why we must always keep the user in mind when developing applications, accessibility, and user experience.
What makes this project different from most developments for blockchain/crypto is that we make a product for a specific target group; we don’t have to look for a target group that fits the product. We know the wishes and problems of our target group very well, and it is our job to adjust the product accordingly so that they benefit the most. Where we differ even more from most projects is that we are assured of a guaranteed order volume, even before a product has been developed. That said, none of this will make our job any easier, but it will make things much more manageable.
The Future of the Blockchain Network and Applications
We have already discussed this several times; the roadmap in the previous chapter also makes it clear what needs to be done and what work lies ahead of us. But we have yet to map out the future entirely. We will initially use a blockchain network developed by others. It will always remain a network of others. It took us a long time to decide which blockchain network to use. Even today, doubts still arise as to whether we have chosen the right network for the tasks we have to accomplish. Still, we should be thankful for the opportunity to develop what we believe is the best solution for our users and members of the CWP.
But precisely because the network belongs to someone else, we will always have certain reservations; this has little to do with the architecture and design of the blockchain network but with other users of the network and third-party application developers on the blockchain network. Without passing judgment on the behavior of other users or third-party applications, is this the appropriate environment for our most important user group? Think of token speculation, interest-driven applications, and, for example, MEV (Maximal Extractable Value). It’s not that we want to forbid our users from using this, but we don’t have to facilitate it.
We are very well positioned for now with our choice of blockchain network. But for the longer term, an independent blockchain network would be a possibility that we should investigate. We have a particular user group, and we are responsible for the environment in which they can use the facilities, such as safety and ease of use. Depending on the applications we develop, it will be assessed whether a proprietary blockchain is considered necessary. But let’s be very clear about one thing; it is not us who ultimately make this choice, but the users, the governance token holders, who will cast their vote.
The future will tell what will be a wise decision, stay where we are and develop further on the sub-net or deploy an independent blockchain. It is the users who, through their activities with blockchain technology, will determine which decision should be made. Will interaction with other blockchain protocols be necessary for everyday use? How can specific applications be shielded from other users only for our users? Not that other users should not have the right to use the applications, but applications are not one-sided products. Applications exist to serve the user.
Then the applications, where can the more significant developments be expected, and which application do we hope to make the most progress? It may be more fun to muse about; do we wish only to develop software, or will it include hardware developments? First, we will discuss digital identity again; how nice would it be if that identity was also used as a login method, with perhaps a part of the Private Key incorporated? Will that digital identity also be part of Zero-Knowledge Proof applications? Is that digital identity also of value in the outside world? On an informal basis, or also suitable for official identification?
Let’s take that side road first:
What is Zero Knowledge Proof?
In cryptography, a zero-knowledge proof or zero-knowledge protocol is a method by which one party (the prover) can prove to another party (the verifier) that a given statement is valid. In contrast, the prover avoids conveying any additional information apart from the fact that the statement is indeed true. The essence of zero-knowledge proofs is that it is trivial to prove that one possesses knowledge of certain information by simply revealing it; the challenge is to prove such possession without revealing the information itself or any additional information.
If proving a statement requires that the prover possess some secret information, then the verifier cannot verify the statement to anyone else without possessing the secret information. The statement being proved must include the assertion that the prover has such knowledge, but without including or transmitting the knowledge itself in the assertion. Otherwise, the statement would not be proved in zero-knowledge because it provides the verifier with additional information about the statement by the end of the protocol. A zero-knowledge proof of knowledge is a special case when the statement consists only of the fact that the prover possesses the secret information.
Interactive zero-knowledge proofs require interaction between the individual (or computer system) proving their knowledge and the individual validating the proof. A protocol implementing zero-knowledge proofs of knowledge must necessarily require interactive input from the verifier. This interactive input is usually in the form of one or more challenges such that the responses from the prover will convince the verifier if and only if the statement is true, i.e., if the prover does possess the claimed knowledge. If this were not the case, the verifier could record the execution of the protocol and replay it to convince someone else that they possess the secret information. The new party’s acceptance is either justified since the replier does possess the information (which implies that the protocol leaked information, and thus, is not proved in zero-knowledge), or the acceptance is spurious, i.e., was accepted from someone who does not actually possess the information. 
 More about Zero-Knowledge Proof can be found here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-knowledge_proof
Digital (online) Identity
There is little to say with certainty here; what that digital identity will look like depends on much more than just that digital identity. But the same digital identity can exist beyond the web and blockchain; there is no doubt about that, surely informal and probably formal. Members can be expected to communicate with each other beyond the web and blockchain with their online identity. The closer the community becomes, the more interaction there will be between the members. Then, at some point, members know each other better by their online identity than by their birth name.
However, the above model has an informal character; what about formally accepting online identity as legal outside the web and blockchain? Is it possible to perform all actions within the project with that one digital identity, not multiple login procedures or switching back and forth between different applications requiring separate login procedures? Perhaps even more importantly, can we continue to guarantee security if we work with one identity and login procedure?
The subject of digital identity will always be an ongoing debate; it is such a complex subject that it is impossible to develop one universal model. We want to take a closer look at the development of the personal data vault and the link with digital identity. Who manages all that data, how can the various applications communicate with the required data, and where is all the data stored? Are the various applications allowed to store and manage this data themselves, or does the data only belong to the relevant digital identity, and does any application ask for specific data to be shared? Because if appropriately managed, it applies to a wide range of applications. In that case, it belongs to the user, who controls what information is shared with third-party applications.
The Personal Data Vault; This is an excellent project to try out the use of a personal data safe, perhaps even to test the limits, because before you realize it, it will be misused on all sides; What are we talking about? Abuse and false claim right about personal data. It is a side project that we have been thinking about for a while. It came to light in the healthcare sector. We are talking about personal patient data. Is it necessary for every healthcare provider to create a complete client file with a medical history and current data and process and store it? At the same time, they only need limited data to do their work. Many healthcare customers have to go through that process repeatedly when they need a new care provider or several providers simultaneously. Each of these providers wants to collect and store its data. Ask involved care providers; they all think they should have complete information and own the data instead of the client.
Let’s be clear; personal data must always be owned by the individual concerned, not by an organization. The individual should be able to manage their data and decide what data to provide and when. This can be a complicated procedure, as individuals only sometimes know where and when specific data is needed. Even then, this should not be a reason for an organization to independently decide what data it should have and what it should do with it. There is a risk that it is no longer possible for the data subject b to check what the relevant data is used for and what the potential consequences are.
Zero Knowledge Proof can help with this; the data requester can submit a proposal for the request of delivery of specific data, accompanied by a certificate on how it will use and store the requested data. The prover will be able to verify whether the data request is relevant and, if agreed, provide the data. The certificate helps the data requester prove that it handles the data honestly and does not use it for purposes other than what is stated in the certificate. Should the data requester act incorrectly, the certificate can be revoked, which could have adverse consequences for the data requester with future data transactions.
This is one of the problems that need to be solved. There are still many more problems that deserve a solution. Our members won’t recognize issues that could be potential problems; they demand from us a smoothly working application they must deal with. That will be the task of all developers to recognize issues and propose solutions jointly. We are building the user interface (UI) for blockchain; the average person will not directly interact with the blockchain. If we succeed, there will be much traffic on the platform, which is suitable for all of us.
It should be clear that the web portal will be the heart of the project; project participants can manage all their activities there. But we go beyond that by developing a web browser. We provide the entire software infrastructure from the start, not just a complete super app. We do this for security purposes and user-friendliness. This can be extended by providing the hardware explicitly manufactured for that purpose, as it is easier to help the remote users if we know what device they are using. By remote users, we mainly mean the members of the CWP because of their need for guidance.
All developments in this area, the web-based portal and web browser, will initially be cross-platform. But in the future, we will move to native platform-specific developments. In the first instance, we want to be able to deliver a product that users can use. Using platform-specific developments as a standard for the longer term is better. Then the applications can be used optimally in all situations, even with a lesser internet connection. This requires time and attention, which will be better deployed now if we spend it on introducing the entire product range as quickly as possible.
The browser will have specific applications to which a revenue model can be linked. We want to create a dynamic environment where users can find inspiration for broader financial security not based on speculation and risky bets. It will provide a more comprehensive understanding of blockchain technology and crypto tokens’ opportunities for the community and the individual. We will not go into details here, but we will discuss all possibilities with the token holders before implementation. All applications are integrated into the web browser and the portal but do not have a static environment; they can be used as a stand-alone solution.
The Wallet is one of the main focus points when developing the project. Without a properly functioning Wallet, every transaction is subject to risks that cannot be controlled. However, making a Wallet unnecessarily complicated drives users away. Where can we find the balance between ease of use and security? What would it be like if we made a wallet with different option levels available to members depending on user experience? Such as a standard basic version, and with experience, more option levels become accessible.
The Wallet must be fully integrated into the web browser, from which the user can carry out any desired transaction. We want to clarify that the project will not promote token trading for speculative purposes. This will be a platform for daily use, for which we will develop everything to make the user comfortable with it. The (recent) past has shown that placing too much emphasis on speculation for the pursuit of profit can put the project under such pressure that this can lead to unacceptable risks to the stability of the project.
Plenty of other options are available to users to find such activities outside this project’s scope. Total exclusion from speculation will not be possible because we will deny the project the opportunity to develop a platform for NFT and the like or a marketplace.
Chat- and Communication Application
This application is of a completely different order; this is being developed for the users to better connect with the project and the community. This can be a lovely development because creativity can thrive wildly here. Why shouldn’t this application contain every available option in the social media landscape?
How about voice and video calling, chatting, and, for example, a function for a tip jar? That’s just the beginning of it all. This application is also part of the digital identity issue; you only need to log in once to access all applications. The possibility that people do not immediately want to disclose their complete digital identity in this application does not detract from this; we could choose to activate a nickname function where the user can use a fictitious name. It is up to the user to which data is disclosed, which is accessible to the external contact partner(s), and which is not shared with the public.
Back to the usage options, we talked about voice and video calling, chat, and a tip jar. But what do you think of a status update function? Which is automatically linked to an interactive log, a mix of Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, TikTok, and whatnot? Could those status updates also be published in game mode? Or vice versa if the game and study progressions are shared in the status updates?
Let’s explore that possibility further; if a social media platform comes along, the marketplace and the job bank can be linked. Rating systems for services and products provided and work performed, including completed modules of the study program, can all be connected to the digital identity as badges. This makes it clear to other users whether the member in question is a reliable and frequent platform user. But again, individual members may decide whether these ratings and badges will be published with their digital identity. It should have an on-off switch.
This is about the chat and communication function. We will not make this application accessible to anyone other than the project members, this is not about blockchain technology but a means of communication to have contact between the members and the project and the members among themselves. It can be supported platform-wide, so the chat function can also be integrated into game mode. We want a live-streaming solution for this application; each community meeting should be broadcasted live when community members cannot attend. Presentations can therefore become accessible to other interested parties.
Then we come to an essential addition; it must have an on/off button. Users will be from different areas worldwide; members do not need to be available 24 hours a day and avoid getting disturbed when inconvenient. The organization can still forward essential messages and even introduce a high-priority notification option. This may be necessary, for example, if failures, blackouts, or malicious activities occur on the network. Or if a critical software update is being implemented. If the notification is entered with high priority, it should only be used in very exceptional cases. But it must be possible for members to temporarily switch off the chat function without turning off their devices.
We could expand on this further, but the bottom line is that this application covers everything that has to do with communication, physical communication, and not just conceptual. So whether it is between the organization of the CWP and the members, between the developers and all users, or between the users themselves, it is the primary means of communication for the community. It is precisely the members who ultimately determine what this application will look like.
Token Exchange (DEX)
There is doubt about developing a full Decentralized Exchange (DEX). What does it mean to have a full DEX available? Do we need a DEX? Many questions to which we cannot yet give a clear answer. But let’s try to commit our thoughts on this to paper.
In any case, we will develop an Automated Market Maker (AMM) where every token belonging to the project can be exchanged. We are talking here about the Governance Tokens and the various Community Tokens, which will probably be expanded later with a game token. But does all that require a full DEX? No full DEX is needed to exchange the different tokens.
We’re talking about the future; there are more questions than answers. What will the future of the project bring? Who dares look into the future and claim it’s a foregone conclusion? We certainly don’t, but that’s mostly because we’re not alone. The community and its members determine the future. We may want to go one way, and the members want to go another direction. Then it is ultimately the members who decide what the future will bring for the project. By members, we mean all stakeholders in the entire community, token holders, and CWP members.
In any case, a token exchange platform for the various community tokens should be implemented. Preferably fully automated, without delay. A platform that the user doesn’t even recognize is there because the sender transacts in the token present in their wallet, while the receiver receives the tokens they prefer. For example, an Egyptian buyer who has Egyptian community tokens in their wallet can transact with an Indonesian seller who wants to receive Indonesian community tokens.
Wherever a community has a community token, it should be able to transact without any friction. This platform could therefore be linked to the marketplace, whereby the provider offers its products or services in their preferred community token. At the same time, the customer gets offers of products or services in community tokens that the customer desires. This makes it immediately apparent to anyone who uses the marketplace, anywhere in the world, what the costs are of the products and services offered, even if those products and services come from the other side of the world.
You transact in the community token you’re already familiar with; no need to guess what those goods and services will cost. It keeps a transaction transparent and no different from transacting with a neighbor from your community. No exchange costs, only transaction costs and, at most, an extra premium for using an Oracle if you want an exchange rate guarantee from an independent third party.
Yes, we can already hear the criticisms; this is not a DEX; what is the use of this to token holders? As we have stated several times in advance, we will not encourage or promote speculation in tokens. This platform was created to help people who still need to become familiar with asset management and investing. We will not ban token speculation, but there are already enough opportunities on the main net to develop those activities.
In the developments, we will mainly focus on peer-to-peer (P2P payments) transactions and ensure that we control this perfectly. A user platform is being developed here, and then we must understand the user’s activities. For that reason, we will focus on P2P payments. In addition, we want to properly analyze existing protocols for yield products and possibly adapt them to the platform’s philosophy. Then we are talking about avoiding interest-bearing products. We believe this can be designed differently and should have a more transparent form. In other words, profit-loss sharing among all parties.
On- Off-Ramp (fiat Gateway)
This ties in well with the latter; it will be done solely to serve the community. For the stability and sustainability of the entire project, we must develop the possibility of having a Fiat Gateway within our ranks. This will not be used a few times by the members of the CWP but monthly and in large numbers. That is why we believe it is in the interest of the project that we will operate the Fiat Gateway in-house. By in-house, we mean the project and, by definition, not the initiators.
It will have to be clear to everyone that this will have to be a regulated business if we want to operate according to the legislation of at least one country. Those who will manage this business are given strict rules under which this can be done. One of the most important parameters will be that it must function subserviently to the project and its members, and profitability is not the primary objective. Initially, it should only serve CWP and Governance Token Holders members on the understanding that anyone who wants to use the services of the Fiat Gateway must also be an account holder with this financial service provider. Please note that there needs to be full compliance with KYC/AML regulations in the country where this entity will be operational.
Short for ‘Know Your Customer’ and ‘Anti-Money Laundering.’ KYC and AML compliance is mandatory; the law requires mitigating the risks of banks and companies being used as vehicles for financial crime. Consisting of various verification, monitoring, and cross-checking procedures, these policies must be watertight to prevent malicious actors from slipping through the net. If not, these entities face high non-compliance fines from regulatory bodies.
While the two terms are often mistakenly used interchangeably, they mean different things. The main difference between KYC and AML is that KYC is a procedure, whereas AML is a complete framework. KYC refers to identity verification procedures used to ensure customers are who they say they are. AML is the umbrella term for all mechanisms deployed to protect against money laundering and financial crime. KYC is one such mechanism.
The issue with this confusion is that entities need to fulfill all regulatory specifications for AML, falsely assuming that KYC processes are enough to pass. However, while KYC procedures aren’t sufficient, installing entire AML operations can be costly and time-consuming. 
 More information on KYC/AML: https://www.dowjones.com/professional/risk/glossary/anti-money-laundering/kyc-vs-aml/
It will be a task to explore the possibilities during the project’s second phase, where acquisition can be expected during the third phase and fully operational from the project’s fourth phase. We still need clear-cut thoughts on how this should be integrated into the project. It will certainly speed up the adoption of the whole project and provide the necessary stability the project needs to make it a success. Nevertheless, serious work must be done to make this possible.
This element is part of the necessary infrastructure, just as the blockchain network is an essential part of that same infrastructure. This business unit will be required to expand the entire project and realize the necessary growth. Growth is needed to offer everyone what can be expected from this project, including value creation for the token holders and other stakeholders.
Let’s look at how we see the future of this part. We would like to see it become an online bank with permanent branches and branch offices in different parts of the world. The bank doesn’t need a physical presence in every country where the CWP is operating, but at the very least, it will need to have an operating license in most countries or regions. This is necessary to simplify the acceptance of the project in all areas. This would be relatively easy for Indonesia; for example, we could manage a network of ATMs where the CWP has a department. It could also be rolled out if the region is big enough in other countries. We would advise against CWP operating offices facilitating cash transactions for security reasons.
If it becomes a bank, it will have to operate independently as a bank and not just serve the network and the project. The bank will be independently responsible for its existence. But in addition, it can therefore operate perfectly as a Fiat Gateway. We could look at Grameen Bank’s model , learn from it and develop a model that fits the project and the network.
A well-functioning bank can help a lot with the onboarding of new CWP members, and it can also assist with the activities under pillars 2 and 3. In addition, it can be a loyal partner for the Treasury of the CWP and BDF. We hope it will become a bank that will fill a significant gap in financial services for Small and Micro Companies; there is a substantial shortage of that in every market. But also a loyal advisor for Small and Medium Enterprises. Many entrepreneurs often face a closed door when they need advice and guidance from their bank. This will be a costly practice, but the benefits for that target group outweigh the disadvantages of the costs.
Everyone will have to understand that a financial service provider should always be of service to the project and should not become a profit machine on its own. There is only one reason we will make such an investment: the members need it to exploit all the project possibilities to their best advantage. The financial service provider is a straightforward addition to existing options. What does a member of the CWP have on participating if the financial resources present within the program cannot be integrated into life outside of the CWP and the blockchain network? It should be an easy transition and therefore be a real improvement. Only then will the project be seen as essential to improving the wealth gap problem.
This financial service provider will not only assist the members of the CWP. Any governance token holder can use the services as long as they have completed full registration as a client. Unfortunately, it will be an obligation to go through this procedure, but only then can it function to the power of the network and thus become the On-Off Ramp that the project needs for optimal day-to-day use.
Gaming & Education Program
This part can also look forward to an exciting future. Gaming for thrills and distractions will only have a short-lived appeal, but as already mentioned, this project is built to provide long-term benefits for all users. Gaming and Education are two different parts, yet we name them under one heading, and developments will also occur from a joint department. We believe that the two parts are inextricably linked.
The educational part will be entirely dedicated to the CWP and its members. It starts with a complete education program for understanding and ease of crypto tokens and blockchain technology use. This will have to be a curriculum that covers the different levels, from beginner to expert level. This can be expanded in the future with programs for personal finance and asset management and modules for entrepreneurship. Members can indicate if they wish to develop the curriculum further. Governance token holders are also invited to use the education program.
For the CWP members, there are mandatory modules that they must complete, but it won’t be time-related; everyone can achieve the compulsory modules in their own time and speed. However, there are consequences to not passing specific modules; certain options within the CWP will not be available before the relevant modules have been passed. On the other hand, we investigate whether passing the compulsory modules can also be rewarded. Should this be a monetary reward, and how much should it be? It should be rewarded more than making the following applications available within the CWP program.
Or are we going in the other direction and looking for appropriate remuneration for non-compulsory modules, promoting more education beyond the compulsory program? We will also have to be careful not to reward every step because then we create a situation where people can only be motivated when a reward is attached.
Part of the educational package will be a simulation game in which all facets of the CWP are converted into gameplay (gamification). This simulation game can be played individually, and in groups, so it is also possible to simulate the effects of participation in pillars 2 and 3. The advantage is that the members can learn from the gameplay and gain insight that active use of the CWP program can be rewarded in the future. The aim is to increase the success rate of the project.
If we want to succeed in the plan to grow the CWP membership to 4 million households and more, we will have to be creative in reaching the participants. Gameplay will undoubtedly deliver an essential contribution to this. New groups can learn from existing groups, and interaction can arise between the different groups; new communities can be founded within the simulation game, which may also have a right to live outside the game.
For the above, it is essential to continue collecting real-life user data within the CWP. This data can be processed in game development. Of course, it will not be personalized data but more data about general results within the CWP. When addressed adequately in game development, the game can also have a steering effect.
What we would like to see for the future is that an Augmented Reality RPG game will also be developed in addition to the simulation game. It should be a game that builds on the simulation game. In this, all communities where the CWP is operational could be represented in 3D, and a storyline created that could have an existence in the real-life community. Think about Pokémon Go.
If this possibility is explored, one will experience real opportunities for building a community economy. The possibilities are endless; it requires a lot of creativity and cooperation from all involved. Starting immediately will be too early, but in 10 to 15 years, when development has not started, people will say it is too late and speak of a missed opportunity.
As soon as the time is right, we will dedicate the following blog article to the benefits of an Augmented Reality game. It allows for building a real play-to-earn economy around the game and maintaining it over a more extended period. It will enable the entire project to scale much larger than the desired 4 million households and realize a project that can no longer be ignored in future society. Hopefully, when Augmented Reality has become an integral part of society, people will say that we were true visionaries to apply this at an early stage. Subsequent generations will then only say: What took you so long?
The Future of the Business Development Fund
The future for the Business Development Fund looks bright. It is expected that the BDF will become a decentralized autonomous organization (DAO) at some point. We can wait until the moment comes, but we prefer to start from scratch to set it up so that it can take that step and the transition is as smooth as possible.
This means that a separate structure must be set up for the BDF. This can be in the form of a foundation, a trust structure, or a combination of both, a foundation with a trust structure, as the CWP has been set up. There is only one significant difference: not one person or group of people will benefit from the proceeds of all business activities. No one personally will enjoy a monetary benefit from the BDF. No one personally owns the property rights of the BDF. This can be an insidious signal to send at an early stage. Whoever receives an investment might think it should not be taken seriously as no one can benefit from the profits. However, that is a wrong assumption; this part of the project must be profit-driven.
Because none of the parties involved may or can benefit personally from the proceeds of this fund, the situation arises in which everyone benefits from the existence of this fund. All proceeds benefit the project. This does create a condition in which it becomes an organization with several Boards and Committees. For example, a committee supervises the composition of the Fund’s Executive Board and Board of Commissioners. In turn, the Board of Commissioners oversees the functioning of the Executive Board. There will also be a committee that oversees the spending of BDF’s corporate profits for the project.
Utility Token Holders can be nominated for a seat in both Committees and the Supervisory Board. But as with any board position within the BDF, they must meet selection criteria and be nominated for a board seat; when the person is deemed suitable, voting by token holders will follow. The Supervisory Board can also appoint members, but they must follow the same path: nomination followed by assessment, and finally, a vote will give a definite answer.
The board of the BDF must be sufficiently suitable not to have to appoint a separate treasurer. Although it will be a foundation, we want an entire board of directors installed. In this, it will be a CEO, a CFO, and a Chief Investment Officer (CIO), with the possibility that CEO and CIO are in shared positions as co-CEO and co-CIO.
What does the project need to function sufficiently to maximize the benefit to users? The BDF has a double function within the project; first, they must ensure that business activities are developed to keep the system stable. In addition, they must make investments that contribute to a healthy community economy in a way that benefits all stakeholders. All that is easier said than done. What exactly does the previous mean, and how should the BDF operate to make all this possible?
The CWP is the driving force behind the project; we can assume that everyone is familiar with the activities of the CWP. A Fiat Gateway will contribute significantly to the project for the stability and user-friendliness of the system. A Fiat Gateway is part of the critical infrastructure. Therefore, we will automatically incorporate such a company into the system under the responsibility of the BDF. When the time is right, we will let everyone know what kind of financial services provider it will be and how members can use its services.
The BDF will not have a position on the Executive Board in that company, which should be left to professionals. Of course, the BDF will claim one or more seats on the entity’s Board of Commissioners. It can be assumed that an existing market party will be acquired and that we will not develop and establish such a company ourselves. Which department will hold the shares of that company is a decision that will still have to be made. This can only be done after we have obtained legal advice from relevant parties. The legislation and regulations in this area and the opinion of the financial regulators and the local central bank will have to be considered.
This is an area where the BDF can serve the CWP, another front that can be just as important is the BDF’s collaboration with the activities under Pillar 2. A crucial role is here for the BDF as an advisor to members and entrepreneurs applying for funding under Pillar 2. The BDF could provide courses on entrepreneurship. Another part that the BDF can fulfill is that of a capital partner. The Micro-communities should invest a maximum of 10% of the total amount available under Pillar 2 in one company. Suppose the requested investment amount exceeds the 10% benchmark. In that case, the relevant community can turn to other communities in the immediate vicinity or invite the Utility Token holders to invest with them. The BDF can also provide capital, as a good investment in a local business always pays off for the community.
We would therefore like to see the BDF allocate 10% of its available funds for this purpose. 10% of the available funds as direct support of the communities under Pillar 2. Since we all use blockchain technology and crypto tokens, another reservation should be made within the available funds; another 10% of the funds should be invested from a Venture Capital Fund structure in startups within the Blockchain, Web3, and Crypto sectors. Whether seed funding or series A funding, it shouldn’t matter much. We prefer strategic investments from which the project can benefit directly because the members can use what will be built.
We won’t isolate a more significant percentage of available funds for particular uses. Sufficient funds will have to be allocated to achieve the overall objective of the BDF. In entrepreneurship, especially in the initial phase of a company, there is a clear danger that can lead to a disastrous outcome for that company. Here we are talking about a lack of cash flow. When insufficient financial resources are available to finance the operational activities, this will lead to a disastrous outcome; the business will cease to exist. So allocating even more funds to demarcated objectives can feed that threat.
The BDF will set up several product laboratories from the remaining available funds to realize product development. Chapter 2 discusses this in detail. It is not to be expected that the BDF itself will take care of the final production. The BDF will support establishing a company and installing the production facility. This can be financed through the BDF in collaboration with the CWP pillar three and be offered to the members, members of the CWP, and the Utility Token holders.
We want to have at least one but possibly several listed companies in the portfolio of the BDF. This offers additional opportunities for capital provision. They could therefore be companies within any sector where the BDF wants to develop activities and products. These companies may function as group holding companies, and further activities within those sectors can be aligned with the listed company to support the company’s results positively.
The BDF will have to guarantee increased transparency to all stakeholders in the project, especially regarding the performance and spending of the available funds. That is why we want the performance and investment portfolio to be visible on the web portal. This should then be done by displaying the value of the BDF online in real-time. The investment policy will have to be coordinated with the Utility Token Holders through annual reporting on the performance of the closed financial year and expectations for next year.
A lot will fall or stand in the development of products; for that reason, a department will be created that will conduct research into product marketing and product placement. Many will consider this a marketing department, but it will be more of a research institute than a marketing department. There is no need to have a research department for each sector; one department for all activities within the project should be enough. The various sectors can issue assignments to this department and seek cooperation. If this department manages its tasks well, it will become a breeding ground for production facilities and marketing. In turn, marketing for the various products and services can also be centrally managed. However, the marketing department will also be tasked with promoting the entire project and bringing it to the general public’s attention. Efficiency in organizing these activities can yield synergy benefits so that costs in these areas remain controllable. We all are doing the project together, so let’s not create islands where everyone fights for their own.
If we organize the activities within the BDF well, the project and the community will benefit on several fronts. Only some products will be a huge success, but we only need a handful of hits to speak of a resounding success. When managed well, the BDF will become one of the anchors for the project. This can ensure a healthy community economy from which all members will ultimately benefit. In addition, we wish to get as many companies as possible into the crypto and blockchain industry. The BDF will have to convince all companies involved in CWP Pillar Two and the BDF to participate in our sub-network actively; then, we can be a fully-fledged Layer 2 project.
Summary Future of the project
What is being attempted here is that a piece of history will be written. The future of everything will remain uncertain if no one pursues it. We will have to take every step to control the future ourselves. But give me a reason why we shouldn’t. The debate about the wealth gap is one from the history books; every generation has had to contend with it, with the result that it is only getting wider. Don’t you get tired of always hearing that the gap between rich and poor is widening, that there is income inequality? No one is wondering when action will be taken.
That’s what we want to do, no, not drive poverty off this planet; we are not yet ready for delusions. We will take action, build community together and ensure an inclusive economy that leaves no one behind.
A lot will have to be built where there will be positive and disappointing moments, but one must learn to look beyond that. We will likely disappoint many people because they want things to move faster. It will be but remember; we are building something that isn’t there. It is easy to copy things, but as soon as something has to be developed that is not there yet, or does not yet exist in the composition being sought, you have to deal with other laws. We cannot apply trial by error; we are responsible for the safety of our members, not all of whom have skill and familiarity with the system.
This project differs from others because we do not build a product and have to find customers for it; we know our customers; we are customers and create a user network in which we all benefit with equal opportunities for all involved. This is not a project where the customer has to learn to deal with the whims of the product. This is not a project where the customer has to adapt to the product’s properties. This project is different from a product in which the question will be whether there will be interest in the product or whether people will adopt it—none of these. Customer traffic is guaranteed with this project; the traffic is already there. If we are not careful, we will be continuously affected by congestion and must manage the traffic in the right direction. It is guaranteed that this project will have a vibrant community. Instead, we will have to guard against any excesses.
That is why we must closely monitor members’ flow into the CWP; the door cannot be opened, and everyone can do their own thing. Those members will come; again, there is no shortage of members; there is too much demand for this project, and there is an absolute necessity. The project derives its raison d’être from the failure of traditional systems. That is why we will separate the social aspect from the rest of the project. The CWP is a project user but will have its own rules and policies to which its members must commit. By the way, this only applies to activities within the CWP; if members want to use the system independently and develop activities outside the CWP, then it is up to them to do what they want, as long as it does not interfere with their participation in the CWP.
We must ensure that members are always listened to carefully; we will have to develop a system for this in which users can make their voices heard and that the project can develop further according to the wishes of the members/users. As much as possible, users will have to be involved in developing applications for the blockchain network. In addition, there is a vital interest that users getting engaged with the decentralization of the network and protocols. We are the initiators, but that does not mean we can do everything alone. Far from it, the project will grow to its full potential with a vibrant community. We are just one of the users; we are not leaders, especially in the future; this is not a project that needs a benevolent dictator. We are and will always remain committed stakeholders in the project, but the community itself will have to assume that leading position as soon as possible. By that, we mean in all areas and facets of the project, including within the CWP and BDF.
The future looks bright for the project. Unfortunately, the current global economic situation will further demonstrate the need for such initiatives. It is up to us to ensure that it becomes a stable safety net for many. We now have the opportunity to develop a system that will be an example for many more initiatives. We are not afraid of competition; the problem we are trying to tackle is far too severe for that. Much more important is that we will stop with endless discussions, they won’t tackle the problem, and actual action must be taken. With this, we will end this chapter and move on to the last chapter, where we will conclude this paper.
Part 4 Conclusion
Since 2008, universal basic income has been back in the spotlight, talked about, and books have been written about this subject, and it is experimented with. But what has lingered now, 15 years later, something that functions well? Another question, why is it taking so long? So many questions, but in addition to all the discussions, a format still needs to be developed that can be implemented as a standard model everywhere. We are not against universal basic income; we support what it tries to achieve. But we are critical of the form, the path it tries to take.
UBI’s long history has been defended from various, often overlapping but occasionally conflicting, ideological perspectives. Like most proposals to expand the safety net, UBI has roots in social democratic, anarchist, and socialist thinking. Ancestors of UBI were discussed by the likes of Thomas Paine (1797) in the form of a lump sum granted to all citizens at adulthood, the Belgian socialist Joseph Charlier (1848) in the form of a “territorial dividend” generating a regular income, and James Meade [1988 (1935), 1993 (1964)] in the form of a “social dividend” in the 1930s and later. Those proposals share with recent versions of UBI a commitment to the view that a share of the wealth produced by all in common, or by previous generations, should be redistributed to all as a direct payment to individuals. In a context of systemic discrimination against African-Americans and the resulting widespread unemployment and poverty, Martin Luther King, Jr. [2010 (1967)], the Black Panther Party, and James Boggs (1968) also considered guaranteed income as a strategy. Meanwhile, feminists, including the Wages for Housework movement in the 1970s, also discussed an income separate from labor to weaken the prominence of the male breadwinner model (Costa & James 1973, Cox & Federici 1976). UBI also has a footing in neoliberal thinking. The economist Milton Friedman famously defended a cousin of UBI, the Negative Income Tax (NIT). He held that the NIT would raise the floor without negatively affecting the price system and market mechanisms and reduce the paternalistic and intrusive state bureaucracy required to decide who, among people experiencing poverty, merits assistance (Friedman 1962, 1968). 
 Extracted from Bidadanure, Juliana Uhuru. (2019). “The Political Theory of Universal Basic Income.” Annual Review of Political Science 22, no. 1 (May 11, 2019): 481–501.
Five features of a UBI system are frequently cited: 1. Periodic: It is a recurring payment (e.g., monthly) rather than a one-off grant. 2. Cash Payment: It is paid in cash, allowing recipients to convert their benefits into whatever they may like. 3. Universal: It is paid to all and is not targeted to a specific population. 4. Individual: It is paid individually (vs. on a family basis). 5. Unconditional: It involves no work requirement or sanctions; it is accessible to the employed and the unemployed, whether voluntarily or not.
Let’s analyze these points and give our opinion on what we do differently. 1. Periodically: In our opinion, you make the recipients dependent on the provider; there is no individualistic character; a centrally controlled body determines who and what they will receive. In most cases, this is the government. But what is the trend that is going on with many governments and their citizens? People do not trust each other. The citizen is bound with a “sword of Damocles” above his head.
The famed “sword of Damocles” dates back to an ancient moral parable popularized by the Roman philosopher Cicero in his 45 B.C. book “Tusculan Disputations.” Cicero’s version of the tale centers on Dionysius II, a tyrannical king who once ruled over the Sicilian city of Syracuse during the fourth and fifth centuries B.C. Though wealthy and powerful, Dionysius was supremely unhappy. His iron-fisted rule had made him many enemies, and he was tormented by fears of assassination—so much so that he slept in a bedchamber surrounded by a moat and only trusted his daughters to shave his beard with a razor.
As Cicero tells it, the king’s dissatisfaction came to a head one day after a court flatterer named Damocles showered him with compliments and remarked how blissful his life must be. “Since this life delights you,” an annoyed Dionysius replied, “do you wish to taste it yourself and make a trial of my good fortune?” When Damocles agreed, Dionysius seated him on a golden couch and ordered a host of servants to wait on him. He was treated to succulent cuts of meat and lavished with scented perfumes and ointments. Damocles couldn’t believe his luck, but just as he was starting to enjoy the life of a king, he noticed that Dionysius had also hung a razor-sharp sword from the ceiling. It was positioned over Damocles’ head, suspended only by a single strand of horsehair. From then on, the courtier’s fear for his life made it impossible for him to savor the opulence of the feast or enjoy the servants. After casting several nervous glances at the blade dangling above him, he asked to be excused, saying he no longer wished to be so fortunate.
For Cicero, the tale of Dionysius and Damocles represented the idea that those in power always labor under the specter of anxiety and death and that “there can be no happiness for one under constant apprehensions.” The parable later became a common motif in medieval literature, and the phrase “sword of Damocles” is now commonly used as a catchall term to describe a looming danger. Likewise, the saying “hanging by a thread” has become shorthand for a fraught or precarious situation. One of its more famous uses came in 1961 during the Cold War, when President John F. Kennedy gave a speech before the United Nations in which he said that “Every man, woman, and child lives under a nuclear sword of Damocles, hanging by the slenderest of threads, capable of being cut at any moment by accident or miscalculation or by madness.” 
We want the recipient to become less dependent. That’s precisely what a periodic payment carries in its heart, dependency; the recipient counts on getting it. If no conditions are attached, it is understandable why a central body such as a government would want to do this. It strengthens the economy in the region where the periodic payment is made, but that only affects the local economy and, by definition, does not make a country’s macro economy more robust.
2. Cash payment: We have nothing against this; it is the only effective way to serve the recipients and ensure they receive the full benefit of the “gift. Ultimately, our program will achieve the same goal and ensure the recipient can use it to their satisfaction. 3. Universal: Good intention, just not yet implemented on a large scale. There is not one pilot project where all citizens of a country were the beneficiaries of such a project, not a city where all inhabitants could enjoy the introduction of such a project. Why? We know the answer to that question secretly, but let’s not say it out loud because we will be labeled opponents of such projects. There are whispers that it is too expensive and that it is not easy to get the finances together for the entire population of a country. Let’s not create illusions and stay realistic. With some creativity, a program can be designed that benefits everyone involved. Yes, the program we introduce does designate recipients. But it clearly states that the CWP Foundation determines which neighborhood and region will be offered the program. Then every member of that particular community becomes a member of the program; it is ultimately up to the individual member to decide whether to use it.
4. Individual: Yes, ultimately, everyone should be able to benefit from the program, so we favor that. However, appointing families as members and beneficiaries of the program is not wrong. This concerns the community structure in which the program is introduced. Each neighborhood has its members registered by a family card. That can, therefore, also be a one-person household. But suppose the program expands to other regions and countries. In that case, it may be that the local organizers decide that members are a group of individuals or associations, as long as the program’s foundation with its three pillars remains. During the research and development of the project, we concluded that the existing dynamics within a community should not be harmed. That is why we opt for families in this case. Because the family is one of the cornerstones of a good society, check the UN report , in which the reader can find that we are not the only ones who think this way. In previous chapters, we made an extensive plea that every household member should eventually have their online ID for the project. When a family is split up, and a family member starts an independent household in the area where the program is operational, that person gets their membership.
5. Unconditional: Nothing can be argued against this. We wholeheartedly agree. Only our program goes a step further in the guidance and training we will provide so that members can ultimately enjoy a higher and more resourceful income with all facets of the program. We are setting up an economy where the community can take matters into their own hands and stipulate that some activities that are not currently rewarded will still be awarded to those who perform the tasks.
All 5 points conclude that we fully support two issues that should not be compromised, cash payment and unconditional. Then there are two points, Universal and Individual, that we agree with but implement differently in practice because it fits better with the program model we choose. Then there remains one point that we are against for many reasons: the periodic aspect. Of course, we want to bind our members to us, but that is not by making them dependent on the “reward” of the program. We do not see it as a reward but a tool to achieve a positive outcome. The reward should not be the sum of money, but the result that can be achieved with that sum, perhaps to a limited extent, but a certain financial independence, taking matters into their own hands and giving hope back to the members, a hope that is vanished in the current economic situation of many.
Suppose you give them a sum of money, whether periodic or a one-off more significant amount, but let the members figure it all out for themselves; eventually, nothing will change, and everything will stay the same. The unconditional aspect is also concealing another element. We fully agree with the conditions that it should not determine whether the recipient is employed. But the final result remains whether someone has paid work, another source of income, or no other regular income. The effect only makes the person more dependent on the program when they do not have another income source, ultimately a bad outcome. The recipients need to be better served by the program. Handing out money without further guidance will not change anything for the recipients; all you do is treat the temporary symptoms, but the underlying conditions are not addressed, so when the program stops, the recipients are back at the beginning and left to their own devices once again.
The chosen model of the CWP has built-in conditions; please look at the different pillars. Within each post, members can decide independently how to spend the money. We advise members and make education available so they can make well-considered and informed spending decisions. The most important conditions are that the funds under Pillar 1 are provided as a credit reserve. The approach is not that debt makes dependent. Yes, it is an automatic connection to the project; the core of the relationship is a form of agreement. Ultimately it is an agreement of the beneficiary with himself; it lays the foundation for further guidance. The members do not repay any debt to CWP or the project; they do not owe anything. Installments are repaid to their credit reserve, which remains in their possession and is reusable for as long as they wish to stay involved in the project.
Even more than personal, the strength of this project will lie in the community, building together a community that offers safety for its members — one of the reasons we want to start this project in Indonesia. One of the initiators and writers of this document has been to many places in the world, grew up in Western Europe, has traveled all over the globe through work, and has now been living in Indonesia for several years. In Indonesia, the writer experienced something new; locally, it is called “Gotong-Royong.” Wikipedia says about this:
Gotong-royong is a conception of sociality ethos familiar to Indonesia. It translates to working together, helping each other, or mutual assistance. In Indonesian languages, especially Javanese, gotong means ‘carrying a burden using one’s shoulder,’ while royong means ‘together’ or ‘communally’; thus, the combined phrase gotong royong can be translated literally as “joint bearing of burdens.” The village’s public facilities, such as irrigation, streets, and houses of worship (mosque, church, or pura), are usually constructed through gotong royong, where the funds and materials are collected mutually. Traditional communal events, such as the slametan ceremony, are traditionally held in the gotong royong ethos of communal work spirit. Each member of society is expected to contribute to and participate in the endeavor harmoniously.
The phrase has been translated into English in many ways, most of which hearken to the conception of reciprocity or mutual aid. For M. Nasroen, gotong royong forms one of the core tenets of Indonesian philosophy. Paul Michael Taylor and Lorraine V. Aragon state, “Gotong royong [is] cooperation among many people to attain a shared goal.”
In a 1983 essay, Clifford Geertz points to the importance of gotong royong in Indonesian life:
An enormous inventory of particular and often quite intricate institutions for effecting the cooperation in work, politics, and personal relations alike, vaguely gathered under culturally charged and fairly well indefinable value-images—rukun (‘mutual adjustment’), gotong royong (‘joint bearing of burdens’), tolong-menolong (‘reciprocal assistance’)—governs social interaction with a force as sovereign as it is subdued.
Anthropologist Robert A. Hahn writes:
Javanese culture is stratified by social class and by the level of adherence to Islam. …Traditional Javanese culture does not emphasize material wealth. …There is respect for those who contribute to the general village welfare over personal gain. And the spirit of gotong royong, or volunteerism, is promoted as a cultural value.
Gotong royong has long functioned as the scale of the village, as a moral conception of the political economy. Pottier records the impact of the Green Revolution in Java:
“Before the GR, ‘Java’ had relatively ‘open’ markets, in which many local people were rewarded in kind. With the GR, rural labor markets began to foster ‘exclusionary practices’… This resulted in a general loss of rights, especially certain harvesting rights within a context of cooperation, known as gotong royong.”
Citing Ann Laura Stoler’s ethnography from the 1970s, Pottier writes that cash was replacing exchange, that old patron-client ties were breaking, and that social relations were becoming characterized more by employer-employee qualities.
For Prime Minister Muhammad Natsir, gotong royong was an ethical principle of sociality, in marked contrast to both the “unchecked” feudalism of the West and the social anomie of capitalism.
Ideas of reciprocity, ancient and deeply enmeshed aspects of kampung morality, were seized upon by postcolonial politicians. John Sidel writes: “Ironically, national-level politicians drew on “village conceptions of adat and gotong royong. They drew on notions “of traditional community to justify new forms of authoritarian rule.”
During the presidency of Sukarno, the idea of gotong royong was officially elevated to a central tenet of Indonesian life. For Sukarno, the new nation was to be synonymous with gotong royong. He said the Pancasila could be reduced to the idea of gotong royong. On June 1, 1945, Sukarno said of the Pancasila:
The first two principles, nationalism, and internationalism, can be pressed into one, which I used to call ‘socio-nationalism.’ Similarly, democracy ‘which is not the democracy of the West’ and social justice for all can be pressed down to one, called socio-democracy. Finally – belief in God. ‘And so what originally was five has become three: socio nationalism, socio democracy, and belief in God.’ ‘If I press down five to get three and three to get one, then I have an accurate Indonesian term – GOTONG ROYONG [mutual co-operation]. The state of Indonesia, which we are to establish, should be a state of cooperation. How fine that is! A Gotong Royong state!
In 1960, Sukarno dissolved the elected parliament and implemented the Gotong Royong Parliament. Governor of Jakarta, Ali Sadikin, expressed a desire to reinvigorate urban areas with village sociality, with gotong royong. Suharto’s New Order was characterized by much discourse about tradition. During the New Order, Siskamling harnessed the idea of gotong royong. By the 1990s, if not sooner, gotong royong had been “fossilized” by New Order sloganeering. During the presidency of Megawati, the Gotong Royong Cabinet was implemented. It lasted from 2001 to 2004. 
This is still practiced today, taking care of the well-being of one’s environment together.
The project is based on building and maintaining communities. Its importance is described pretty well here:
Sense of Community
“Community is something we do together. It’s not just a container,” said sociologist David Brain. Infrastructure, roads, water, sewer, electricity, and housing provides the shell within which people live. Within this shell, people do the things together that allow them to sustain their livelihoods. These include but are not limited to education, health care, business, recreation, and spiritual celebration. People working together with shared understandings and expectations provide a strong community.
There are several ways that people may form a community, which subsequently influence the way a society may be strengthened:
- Locus, a sense of place, refers to a geographic entity ranging from neighborhood to city size or a particular milieu around which people gather (such as a church or recreation center).
- Sharing common interests and perspectives refers to common interests and values that could cross geographic boundaries.
- Joint action, a sense of coherence and identity, included common informal activities such as sharing tasks and helping neighbors, but these were not necessarily intentionally designed to create community cohesion.
- Social ties involved relationships that created an ongoing sense of cohesion.
- Diversity referring not primarily to ethnic groupings but to the social complexity within communities in which a diversity of communities co-exist.
Regardless of the type of community formed, performing community-building and making a difference is possible. How community-building takes place varies and depends on the factors listed above. There are many activities that communities use to strengthen themselves. 
This phenomenon is familiar to other regions and areas. Still, it is felt most strongly in Indonesia, the togetherness to do things for the good of the community, in that no individual is more important than the community. One is so strong as the bond within the community.
The initiators believe that a healthy community economy ensures a strong community. The basis is formed by the community rather than the CWP, the CWP provides the necessary attention and traffic, yet it is only part of the whole. If the CWP and its members are only part of the total community, what makes the connection of the community with the other participants/members? For this topic, we refer to the following:
Community economic development (CED) is a field of study that actively elicits community involvement when working with government and private sectors to build strong communities, industries, and markets. It includes collaborative and participatory involvement of community dwellers in every development area that affects their living standards.
An aspect of “localizing economics,” CED is a community-centered process that blends social and economic development to foster communities’ economic, social, ecological, and cultural well-being. Community economic development encourages using local resources to enhance economic opportunities while sustaining social conditions. It facilitates the practical exploration and utilization of local resources for optimal community advantages. Often CED initiatives are implemented to overcome crises and increase opportunities for disadvantaged communities. For example, neighborhood business organizations target growth in specific commercial areas by lobbying government authorities for special tax rates and real estate developments.
Community economic development is an alternative to conventional economic development. Its central tenet is that: “… problems facing communities—unemployment, poverty, job loss, environmental degradation and loss of community control—need to be addressed in a holistic and participatory way.”
Theories and strategies
The most significant aspect of community economic development, aside from the fact that it focuses on economic growth in specific localities, is that it focuses on the process of community building. This “community” aspect of CED assumes that the community will play a dynamic role in economic development processes and that community development will contribute to sustained economic growth and vice versa. In this understanding, the community is considered an input and output in this CED equation.
Looking at CED from an economic viewpoint, the initial purpose of such an approach is the creation of local jobs and stimulating business activity. Integrally linked to these purposes are strategies to increase access to capital, encourage asset building, improve the general business climate, and link citywide economic development efforts to specific community development efforts.
Increasing access to capital is an essential strategy for community economic development. Historically, poor neighborhood residents have experienced difficulty finding access to capital because they are traditionally viewed as credit risks. In places where banks offer services, these residents face structural barriers such as minimum deposit requirements, high service fees, and complex paperwork. To solve these problems, a community economic development approach would develop alternate neighborhood community development financial institutions such as community development credit unions, community development banks, and community development venture capital funds.
Improving the general business climate is also integral to community economic development. Strategies to do so include improving the infrastructure and physical appearance of commercial areas, the quality of quantity of residential housing, and the transportation systems in a neighborhood. While these may not directly affect economic activities, they strengthen an area’s financial well-being by encouraging businesses to locate there. 
 For more on this topic, see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_economic_development
Most of the articles cited here refer to a community in the sense that it has a physical footprint. But nowhere is it written that a community can only exist if it has physical boundaries. In the case of the project, a large community will be developed without physical borders, living entirely online. In this case, we should not speak of a community in the literal sense but of a network. A network that binds everything together and of which physical communities are part. Communities are deliberately written in the plural here; it is quite possible to have one network (macro) and several communities (micro) processed within it that jointly want to achieve the same goal. Within the extensive network, it is also possible to have physical and online communities, where offline communities also get an online presence.
The binding factor of all those sub-communities is the shared community economy. This economy allows all participants in their roles to benefit from the network and be part of a community. The binding economy provides security but also communication between the individual communities. Because all participants have the same common denominator, the community economy, we must jointly ensure that it can function optimally without being disrupted by external factors. Welcome the blockchain technology. This allows the entire network to fend for itself without one or more external factors disturbing the peace.
Blockchain technology enables the network to have a fully documented online existence that cannot be threatened by any one of several parties. No one within the network is exclusively responsible for the administration; no minority can determine the rules, preventing a minority from being the dominant factor and thus being able to bend the rules to its will. It simultaneously obliges all members to jointly ensure the decentralization and processing of all transactions, which a transaction has for content. Together, all members determine the state of the consensus mechanism.
A consensus mechanism is a program used in blockchain systems to achieve distributed agreement on the ledger’s state. Generally, it is deployed in a network with many processes and users. Cryptocurrencies, blockchains, and distributed ledgers benefit from their use as the consensus mechanism replaces much slower human verifiers and audits.
- A consensus mechanism is any method to achieve agreement, trust, and security across a decentralized computer network.
- In blockchains and cryptocurrencies, proof-of-work (PoW) and proof-of-stake (PoS) are the most prevalent consensus mechanisms.
- Consensus mechanisms are essential to securing information by encrypting it and using automated group verification.
Consensus mechanisms have become essential to distributed ledgers, databases, and blockchains because much of the world is becoming more digital. Ownership of physical assets is being tokenized on ledgers and blockchains, people without access to financial services have access through blockchains, and businesses need data security more than ever.
Consensus mechanisms verify data inputs and outputs, which translates to automatically auditing the digital transactions that are common today—without human oversight or intervention. They create an environment where you don’t need to trust that the other party in a transaction is honest because they ensure the information is unalterable and secure. 
As described earlier, the initiators attach great importance to a strong community economy. To make that possible, it is, therefore, necessary to look at the activities of most participants on the blockchain network. It isn’t so much to do about what each interaction with the network entails but more about which activities generate the most traffic. In this one, it will be financial transactions. This means that the emphasis of the developments for the network will have to be on applications for a peer-to-peer payment network—direct transactions between parties without the intervention of an intermediary. Nothing will handle this problem better than a blockchain network. A decentralized network that every participant can blindly trust.
The blockchain network is part of critical infrastructure; the importance for all participants is that not just a few operators manage this infrastructure but rather that it will be distributed as much as possible with as many nodes that will ensure decentralization. To promote decentralization, there should be an incentive program where those who provide real decentralization (node administrators) are appropriately rewarded. A reward that justifies it to carry out these activities on a cost-effective basis. Other work is for delegators and validators, who supervise the transaction routing and approve and process transactions. All this work must be encouraged with appropriate remuneration, but this remuneration structure should not reflect an income stream. The network should discourage the high concentration of tokens into a limited number of staking pools that share the revenue. The number of tokens tied up in token pools does not determine decentralization. The number of different node operators, validators, and delegators defines the degree of decentralization, so that should be promoted.
Now that we’ve covered the network, another important topic should be discussed. Tokens, because one thing is sure is that fiat currencies cannot be registered on the blockchain network. In the digital age, a token has become a fixed term, whereby a token can also be used as a means of payment. Most importantly, all participants must acknowledge the token’s value and use it as a directory for all financial transactions. The primary token will be given its price value which will act as a referee for the valuation of the transactions within the macro network, with the micro-communities getting their specific token which will have a reflected value based on the fiat currency of the physical community.
Why not directly use the community token as a general means of payment for the entire project? Suppose we start using the various community tokens as a medium of exchange outside the community. In that case, this medium will also be taken up by third parties without them having any interaction with the project. Then it can also be used for other purposes, and speculative actions come to the fore as the first thoughts. Keeping the exchange rate fixed to the fiat currency will become very costly. Suppose the CWP gets an expansion to other regions and countries with all different community tokens. In that case, we will soon only be busy keeping those community tokens value par instead of being busy with other necessary things for the project. In other words, the token design of utility tokens combined with community tokens is a protection construct rigged for the project’s good. Community token holders need to understand the token’s value over extended periods. In this case, that is the specific community token. To translate that value into something trusted and of \what they understand the importance of it, the value of the community token becomes a reflection of the fiat currency they deal with daily. But to retain that value, the community token must only continue circulating within its community.
The community token holders are hardly exposed to the fluctuating value of the Utility token because, in standard cases, they perform instant transactions. Only if the token holder decides to hold the Utility token over a more extended period can this generally affect the value. However, the Utility token, not the community token, determine that transactional value. The CWP organization cannot be held responsible for any loss of value caused by a fluctuating value of the Utility token.
It can be assumed that it is clear what the community token is for, a community-owned transaction tool. The Utility token is the connecting factor between all communities and the outside world. It is also the token used as a reward for work for the network. Those who use their tokens to keep the network functioning properly can also use this token as a voting ballot. The project will have to be fully decentralized as soon as possible. Then the Utility token helps to have a voice in the project’s direction. The initiators are also token holders but have absolutely no majority. Ultimately, the initiators will have a maximum of 0.76% of the voting rights. That is not a concentrated amount, so it will never be able to have a majority vote.
The initiators will be the first to direct the project, but to hand it over to a token holders committee that will ultimately ensure the appointment of the various board positions in the multiple foundations. The Foundations of which can again be converted into various DAOs.
What Is a Decentralized Autonomous Organization (DAO)?
A decentralized autonomous organization (DAO) is an emerging legal structure with no central governing body whose members share a common goal to act in the entity’s best interest. Popularized through cryptocurrency enthusiasts and blockchain technology, DAOs are used to make decisions in a bottom-up management approach.
- A decentralized autonomous organization is an entity structure in which token holders participate in the management and decision-making of an entity.
- A DAO has no central authority; power is distributed across token holders who collectively cast votes.
- All votes and activity through the DAO are posted on a blockchain, making all actions of users publicly viewable.
- One of the first DAOs, The DAO, was created by developers to automate decisions and facilitate cryptocurrency transactions.
- A DAO must prioritize security, as exploits can leave a DAO drained of millions of dollars of its treasury savings.
Benefits of DAOs
There are several reasons why an entity or collective group of individuals may want to pursue a DAO structure. Some of the benefits of this form of management include:
- Decentralization. Instead of relying on the actions of one individual (CEO) or a small collection of individuals (Board of Directors), a DAO can decentralize authority across a vastly more extensive range of users. Decisions impacting the organization are made by a collection of individuals as opposed to a central authority that is often vastly outnumbered by their peers.
- Participation. Individuals within an entity may feel more empowered and connected to the entity when they have a direct say and voting power on all matters. These individuals may not have strong voting power, but a DAO encourages token holders to cast votes, burn tokens, or use their tokens in ways they think is best for the entity.
- Publicity. Within a DAO, votes are cast via blockchain and made publicly viewable. This requires users to act as best as their votes and decisions will be publicly viewable. This incentivizes actions that benefit voters’ reputations and discourage acts against the community.
- Community. The concept of a DAO encourages people worldwide to come together to build a single vision seamlessly. With just an internet connection, token holders can interact with other owners wherever they may live.
Limitations of DAOs
Not everything is perfect regarding DAOs. There are severe consequences to improperly setting up or maintaining a DAO. Here are some limitations to the DAO structure.
- Speed. With a DAO, every user is allowed to vote. If a CEO guides a public company, a single vote may be needed to decide a specific action or course for the company. This requires a much-extended voting period, especially considering time zones and priorities outside the DAO.
- Education. Like the speed issue, a DAO educates many people regarding pending entity activity. A single CEO is much easier to keep comprised of company developments. At the same time, token holders of a DAO may have ranging educational backgrounds, understanding of initiatives, incentives, or accessibility to resources. A common challenge of DAOs is that while they bring a diverse set of people together, that diverse group of people must learn how to grow, strategize, and communicate as a single unit.
- Inefficiency. Partially summarizing the first two bullets, DAOs run a significant risk of being inefficient. A DAO may get bogged down in trivial administrative tasks due to the need to coordinate many more individuals. Because of the time needed to administratively educate voters, communicate initiatives, explain strategies, and onboard new members, it is easy for a DAO to spend much more time discussing change than implementing it.
- Security. An issue facing all digital platforms for blockchain resources is security. A DAO requires significant technical expertise to implement; without it, there may be invalidity in how votes are cast or decisions made. A trust may be broken, and users leave the entity if they need help to rely on the structure of the entity. Even using multi-sig or cold wallets, DAOs can be exploited, treasury reserves stolen, and vaults emptied. 
But that is a decision ultimately for the Utility token holders to make. For the time being, the Foundation of the CWP cannot be converted to a DAO because it will need a physical presence to shield the members from laws and regulations. Although the CWP will be spread over different continents, it will only be operational in a few countries during the first years. As it is a relatively new phenomenon, regulators will want a point of contact, and we cannot leave that to the program’s beneficiaries. However, this relates to the operational activities of the Foundation, which does not mean that certain parts, such as the treasury of the CWP, cannot be structured in a DAO. But again, it is ultimately up to the Utility token holders to decide on this.
We lead the project’s development process with the best intentions and enable the start of the project. Still, the token holders and community members should take over the leadership role as soon as possible. This does not mean the project’s initiators want to escape their responsibility. Far from that, but this is not a development for a limited number of people; it must be developed as widely as possible. It is up to the token holders to decide whether to re-mandate the initiators to lead the development and direction of the project. If they do, the initiators will also seize that responsibility.
Now to the last topic, a topic that started it all. The changing economic landscape. It is not just a changing economic playing field. We live in a digital age; generations are growing up knowing nothing but a digital world. Also, industry 4.0 is now taking shape. Production, an essential aspect of this project, is changing very quickly. When the author of this document started this, he was working on another project, a robot for clothing production. But the pandemic changed things significantly, giving the final push toward this project. We develop this project for a target group that works in jobs at risk due to this changing climate.
Here is another role for the project. We want to make the production of goods an essential resource for the economy of this project, so let’s not just carry out that production analogously. So far, this is still done for one important reason, which is bland to mention, but the truth is that the wage costs for labor still make this possible. Suppose we have already indicated that this is a project for now and the future; we must seize that opportunity. Start digitizing production as much as possible. But also to provide training that can cope with the changes in the labor market. Unfortunately, the school system lags, but that should not blind us. We will soon have a whole army of members of the CWP; a large majority of the work they still do will change rapidly; let’s help those people further.
Let’s also prepare them for that rapidly changing future. This starts with being the first to recruit workers from the membership base. But where possible, also provide (re)training—looking together at where the strengths and interests of the people lie. Some people like to become entrepreneurs; others prefer the stability of a 9 to 5 job. That is precisely where we can benefit from the individual’s strengths and wishes. Everywhere there is a shortage of workers, but all countries still have a group of unemployed people; why don’t we try to get them on board? It’s not all about money, or at least that is how it should be. Now let’s all make sure that no one has to be left behind.
It took a very long time to develop this. Sometimes we thought the project was already finished, only to find out later that it was pretty close and that there were too many weaknesses that we shouldn’t expose all community members to. So we had to return to the drawing board and start again in some areas. As an entire community, we will make this project possible; we will all reap the benefits, whatever role someone takes in this project. We have a project with a future; 100 years from now, we will still say that this project has a lot to go for. Unfortunately, the gap between rich and poor is far from being closed.
That gap has been created over hundreds, perhaps a thousand years. It is a testate of intellectual poverty that we have yet to succeed in tackling the problem. This project will not be able to play a part in addressing this issue on a world stage, but it will undoubtedly shock its participants. It’s up to everyone involved how far we can spread this. The project is ready to scale up and can handle up to 500,000 new CWP members annually. Again, this will only be possible in stages, step by step. It starts with 400-plus members for year one, onboarding a million members total in year ten, and up to 500,000 members yearly in year 14. At least, that’s what our forecast says. It can be faster but also slower; the community partly controls that.
The good thing about it is that we are not running a continuous process of external fundraising. A total of 3 funding rounds have been forecast. After that, the project can self-finance, and any number of scale-ups can be reached. This project does not rely on donations and goodwill from third parties. We, as a community, build it together, and everyone involved will benefit from it. To quote a number, at 100,000 members for the CWP, we have created an internal economy that exceeds US$800,000,000.00. That is not the value of the project; that is the value that goes around in the internal project economy. Project value will be many times higher. All without a penny of external debt.