The "participatory economy" seems like a gross gamification of online social interaction. It's important that people have aspects of there lives that aren't driven by financial incentives. I would argue that online communities, especially more niche, subscription-based ones, are driven and should be driven primarily by interest. Why do participants need to be "compensated" for their engagement?

> What if instead the community took a portion of the fee stream and distributed it to the members who most positively impacted the community?

I think it's arrogant to think we can develop a reward system that can both accurately match reward to real-world impact (how do you even quantify that?) and also avoid the trap of influencing users' behavior toward optimizing their virtual rewards (participatory income?) over engaging with their community authentically.

Subscription-based online platforms like Twitch and Patreon already work, what is the great improvement that a "participatory economy" brings?