I have something that might be of interest to you guys. We’re looking for chemistry and material science experts to join a giant online
collaboration to solve an interesting chemistry problem.
So, you appear to be asking for people to provide free work for the benefit of your for-profit business.
I also see the people whose problems are supposed to be solved by your for-profit business are required to pay you, but are not required to pay
anybody else, even if results are produced which meet and exceed the requirements of the proposal.
Sounds like a great business model... for you.
I'll make you a counter offer.
If you'll just sign all rights to, and equity in, your business to me; then I'll let you work free for my benefit as long as you like.
Bear in mind your success at any project you do for me does not entitle you to payment, no matter how valuable your contribution.
You might get one, but you have no right to one, so it'll be entirely at our (the people who already have your idea) discretion.
Sounds tempting, doesn't it?
EDIT: Your Ideaconnection sites would look more professional if you learned to use the spellcheck.
"Wendy also studied programming at Niagra Collage"
However it is gratifying to know your opinion of this site is so high you're here looking for what you describe to your customers as, "a database of
the world's best minds."
If you can't find "the world's best minds" here, where next; Encyclopedia Dramatica?
[Edited on 18-6-2018 by SWIM]MJ101 - 18-6-2018 at 16:22
I thought that sciencemadness,org -was- a chemistry think tank. DrP - 19-6-2018 at 00:23
Alternatively, store your solvent in a more convenient format, such as a bottle.
I'd imagine that the solvent is residual left over from the production of the matrix material. So Smashing up might not be an option if he wants to
keep his product in one piece. I agree with the vacuum and heating though - I can't think of anything else. We'd clearly need more info as to what the
material the matrix is made from etc..
WGTR - 19-6-2018 at 05:31
I can see that this type of business model may work for a pool of contributors who are retired or have nothing better to do, but this doesn't seem
like a long-term viable way to supply a quality applied research service. There is no guarantee of income to the people who are contributing their
time and possibly their own equipment and money. The people who are best qualified to contribute will most likely be employed full-time by
competitors of your clients, where they will be paid well and have benefits.
I can almost assure you that some of your clients will not accept any of the contributions as sufficient, and are merely fishing for ideas. They will
then take the findings to someone like us, where the conversation will sound something like this:
"We're having trouble with _____ (fill in the blank). Here are some possible solutions that we've come up with (ideas from the contributors), but
what can you come up with?" And then they will pay us for our time. This business model works great for ideaconnection, as it removes their risk of
having to maintain a roll of employees and provide benefits to them. It works great for the customer, as they can obtain low-cost or free consulting.
The contributors get the raw deal, though. The risk model is completely flipped upside down.
Running a business is risky; it can pay off greatly, or more often than not end in disaster. That's why I never begrudge a business for paying their
key people large piles of cash. Higher risk should equal higher returns if the investment strategy is sound.
If you want talented people then you have to offer a fair wage and pay them, accepting that sometimes they will be very busy, while at other times
they may be sweeping floors from lack of work. Responsibility for low utilization usually falls on upper management, as it is their job to provide
direction for the company and bring in contracts. If you can't handle this type of risk, then work an 8-5 job like most everyone else. At the very
least, offer to pay contributors something for their time, regardless of their results. If they come with good references, and ideaconnection has a
good enough reputation, then the customer should feel comfortable absorbing this risk.
Keep in mind in the field of research that sometimes a negative result is the best possible outcome to a problem. Sometimes a problem simply can't be
solved the way the customer wants, but the people doing the work have provided a valuable service and should get paid for their time.
If you want to minimize risk to the customer then provide milestones, with the option for them to terminate the remainder of the contract if they are
not getting the results that they hoped for.DrP - 19-6-2018 at 07:49
Reading the problem further..... maybe it needs further prolonged mastication in the aqueous system with continued renewing of the water to wash away
the unwanted volatile as it is rinsed out of the product.
walruslover69 - 19-6-2018 at 09:49
What do they mean by the term "viscous" i have never heard the term used for a solid.
Also they are incredibly broad. I feel like they should have much more information on the structure of the matrix. aga - 19-6-2018 at 12:19
It's all a bit fishy really.
If you're desperate, go ahead and see if any $ drops out. You never know.
These bits of the webpage you see clicking the OP's link seem a bit contradictory to me:-
"participants will be awarded for the best contribution to the discussion"
"Enter ideas, vote ideas up or down, comment on ideas, vote comments up or down"
"The sponsors will choose the winners"
What's the point of voting when that last bit is there ?
