@Cy Ko

"The idea is not to get mad at eachother."

Well, you called me a "deep idiot with a touch of evil", so I think you have to work on that.

"They think I am attacking the CULT... so their reflex is to defend it!!!"

I don't think that. You called Farsight's price plan "morally creepy". I tried to explain to you why it's not a moral issue. Has nothing to do with defending a cult.

"The point is to reach as many people as possible. A paywall kills this."

I already tried to mitigate this problem with this suggestion. I made a survey to ask people wether they are willing to pay even if there's no paywall:

https://www.farsightprime.com/forums/general/70737-survey-regarding-farsight-s-business-model

So far, 6 people took the survey, 4 willing to pay without paywall. I expected more people to answer that question or at least being interested in a different business model, but in reality, it seems like most people don't care.

@Elemi

"Instead of focussing on the different standpoints, why don't you just join forces and put the energy into a common RV business?"

Okay, let's create a business plan without a paywall. I suggest a model like Patreon or GoFundMe, where people can decide freely how much they want to pay the viewers based on how useful the information is. Any more ideas?

DAO would be the way to go, but using a blockchain as a DLT comes with problems most people don't realize yet. A blockchain based DLT still is a form of centralization, it's just that you have a consensus about how to distribute and update the ledger. I call it "decentralized centralization", or pseudo-decentralization – because people on this planet still can't grasp what real decentralization would look like.

It boils down to the problem of who owns the blockchain by owning the consensus algorithm and the infrastructure it's running on.

I'm already working on an IPFS based solution that doesn't come with pseudo-decentralization like all the other blockchain based solutions, but it's not ready yet.

Regardless of what-ever social-system you try to come up with, its quality will still always depend on the intellectual-honesty and spiritual-development of its users/participants, with Craig's List being an example of a once «free-speech» platform, but, now is an absolute cess-pool of censorship of any kind of «important» topic and completely useless system full of whom are often called «flaggots» where there is very little information that can be obtained or exchanged that involves any level of critical-thinking skills; the ULTIMATE-CHALLENGE (something which I am personally familiar with and which I also intuitively KNOW that the Harvey-Group with Far-Sight is also seeking to accomplish) really boils down to trying to get the MENTAL-PSYCHOLOGY of the «slaves» to STOP believing in «authoritarians» and «scammers» and «cult-leaders» and the like so that the «slaves» can finally STOP perpetuating their OWN «enslavement» and enslavement-system(s) which also ultimately keeps everybody else on the whole entire damn planet enslaved...

Community Policing ? That was shown to be a FAILED «Experiment» when the «communities» themselves were FULL of Authoritarian-Control & Cult-Minded Members...

"Any talented grandma in africa could join for free and make some chips for the family with it."

Getting the incentives right is the most difficult process when inventing new stuff. A good example is Bitcoin: Its potential is a deflationary monetary system independent of governments, while in reality, most people use it for speculation to satisfy their greed for more fiat money.

In the same way, we don't want the grandma in Africa just do it for the money. Which is exactly Cy Ko's argument that started this thread. It's not a moral issue, but a consequential problem. Do we manifest the right consequences with a system that let's everybody participate just to make money?

So, when money is the initial incentive to get people into it – how do we ensure that it's not developing into a corrupt mess?

Regarding the banter: 10 years ago I would say "it's so immature to banter" - but today I actually think on a forum it's fantastic. The beauty of it is it can only escalate so far, where is it gonna go. If you get so mad you get off your chair, then what? Some people feel like it's wasted reading, pish-posh. I think it keeps them glued, we're addicted to drama. If you don't like it go sit on Google scholar for 8 hours. Keep fighting, here's a toast.

So regarding the main post, the $5,000 fee could very well be a stupid idea. It's capitalism I guess, the free will to make stupid decisions. What I will say is people seem to be overlooking the fee for challenging the exam as a basic remote viewer.

You have to be stupid not to see the value in it. $100 and you get certified. Jesus, I can't be a forklift driver for that small amount of money. And the materials are all free off the website.

If I was you I would mob Farsight asking to challenge the exam. If they change the price oh well. But that little paper basically gives you the power to levy an income stream that keeps paying in rather than a one time shot like a sell off of crypto.