Can we build a better game?

[luan]

@kempsterrrr

Without having to worry about budgets, Governance, legal, finance etc.

Yes.

@kempsterrrr

Should we redesign our $CODE rewards model to also reward folks for participation and learning, not just contribution, to help foster the primarily social experience that made the DAO great in the first place, and help achieve our mission?

Yes, we definitely should. I’m meeting with the founders of Otterspace and Rep3 this week, regarding potentially utilizing badges as part of a redesign of the member UX.

If I like what I see, then I’ll move forward with building this out. If implemented well, it can add greater meaning to what has so far been a linear member UX, as well as one-sided/monolithic (the belief that everyone wants to be a ‘contributor’).

Badges can potentially help to make the member UX layered and thus, more valuable. Some great experimentation can happen. To quote something I mentioned to @wolovim during the early hours, regarding the Events initiative I’ve undertaken (I was mentioning how the existence of DD Labs enables us to operate in ways we previously weren’t able to):

This empowers DAO members to freely stage their own gatherings, which the DAO itself can still benefit from by association. I’m meeting with the founders of Otterspace and Rep3 this week regarding utilizing badges as a way to feed into the member UX (and ultimately quantify engagement). And I think even in this specific context — it allows us to essentially implement a vetting system via the badges. Meaning we’re only putting the DAO’s resources (merch) and credibility behind people who have actively and meaningfully been participating in the community.

Without possessing a certain badge, you cannot apply to stage an event where the DAO provides merch. With it, you can.

Badges potentially signify a points system, that (if implemented well) grants members access to additional privileges. And helps to bring some additional metrics to the DAO’s membership.

I went on to talk about monetization stuff, but all in all: I’m 100% pro re-designing the existing $CODE reward model to better fit into a non-contributor context.

@kempsterrrr

Can we increase the utility of the $CODE to provide more value to members, by introducing staking, using it to unlock opportunities in the DAO, and/or to allocate treasury funds in a more decentralised (and fun!) way (i.e. like ENS small grants)?

I know we’ve largely discussed this in the context of Agency, but I’m pro the idea being applied across the broader DAO.

@kempsterrrr

Should we make the DAO itself smaller, disconnecting $CODE governance so directly to commercial and operational considerations, and rather use Governance to empower members to create Sub-DAOs that can more easily create value for the DAO and its ecosystem overall?

Keen to read your thoughts