---
# System prepended metadata

title: 'Proposal: DAOhaus WarGames Summer 2022'
tags: [UX Research, WarGames]

---

---
###### tags: `WarGames` `UX Research`
---

# Proposal: DAOhaus WarGames Summer 2022 
🗡🩸🛡

:::spoiler **Context**

- WarGames will be used as a rigorous *battletesting* tool for testing product features, bug hunting, and generating data on social/cultural aspects of the DH platform.
- This data might lead to a formal taxonomy of DAO templates for internal reference in our product development and as an offering for the open-source ecosystem.
- Allows us to visualize *how we think* processes/features are working compared to*how they are actually* working.
- If we can test these models against each other, this might provide evidence for us to justify collective decisions and preserve bandwidth for the rest of the organization.
:::

:::spoiler **Initial Prompts**

- How might we begin with high-level overview of a scenario while restraining to rush towards solutions of how they might play out?
- How might we avoid articulating hyptheses that are too high-fidelity, to create a general problem statement that allows us to observe and learn from behaviors within those general models?
- How might public, social, gamified testing influence our product strategy?
- How might this steady flow of user data influence our rage/sage build modes?
- *Please add prompts that you think are relevant from your own role in the DAO*
:::

::: spoiler **WarGame Overview**

- **Resolution**: The scale of the game. WarGames are simultions at 1:1 scale. This should be maintained by the game designers to ensure that the testing data remains meaningful.
- **Fidelity**: The amount of detail in the game. How much information is required to maximize the impact of the experiment? When does fidelity become an impediment to observing the useful data of the simulation?
- **Velocity**: The timespace of the game. How much time is required to gain a sufficient observation of the problem space? When is more time become undesireable? This is set by the game designers.

::: spoiler **Rules About the Rules for the Ruler Makers**

- Each game will determine it's own period. This might range from a few hours, a few days, or a few weeks, depening on the scale and complexity of the game.
- Games can run concurrently, but only 1 new game should be initiated each week.
- Each game requires a dedicated research team before it can be initiated. That team will be responsible for:
    - Defining the rules to the players.
    - Outlining the method for the researchers.
    - Setting up the DAO infrastructure.
    - Overseeing the progress of the game.
    - Determining when the game is over.
- The success/fail metrics must be made clear to the players before the game begins, unless this is in conflict to the intended results, in which case they must be recorded into the method and kept hidden until the game is complete.
- Each game should be located in a specific area of the games board, referred to as **Theaters of Engagement**: 
    - Roles defined by characteristics, actions, needs
    - Roles formalized in relation to each other
    - Circles formalized in relation to each other
    - Super Circles as composites across circles/roles
    - The DAO as composite of all of the above
    - DAO-to-DAO overlaps, sharing personnel
    - Communities of DAOs as all of the above
    - DAOs-of-DAOs (federated DAOs) as composite of all of the above
    - Moloch-style DAOs in relation to other DAO protocols
    - DAOs in relation to trad orgs, DINOs, and legacy systems

::: **Rules About the Game for the Players of Games**

- **Briefs**: Two briefs will be generated for each game to provide an explicit overview of the problem space.
1. *External brief*: set, setting, rules of the game provided to the players before starting the game.
2. *Internal brief*: methodology, areas of focus, metrics provided to the evaluators of the simulation, to be added to the UX Research & Testing kanban board.
    - Both briefs will be presented in the following format:
        - Overview: "set" of the game
        - Game board: "setting" of the game
        - Hypothesis: rules of the game
        - Method: evaluating the game (for the testers)
        - Retrospective: Extracting learnings from the game (for the testers)
:::

::: spoiler **Current Game Scenarios to Play**

#### MetaOS Design Exploration

[Design Overview](https://hackmd.io/@daohaus/SJ3vJEfm5)
[Ven's "Paper Protoype"](https://hackmd.io/@daohaus/BkXvypVX5/edit)
- Testing our presumptions about the MetaOS, in relation to what we hope it to be while observing what it has the potential to become.
- How to gamifiy the UI in relation to DAO user flows?
- What information might the MetaOS convey to empower a player to exercise an advantage over other players?
- How might the winning/losing of a game be used to inform and justify this UI framework?
- How might different game scenarios (positive sum, non-zero sum, etc) inform different designs for the UI?

#### Uberhaus v1.5 > v2.0 & WarCamp Reboot & ~~Holacracy~~

[FUberHaus v1.5 Proposal](https://forum.daohaus.club/t/72-fuberhaus-v1-5-fubar-blizzard/10849)
[Detailed Outline for this Scenario](https://hackmd.io/@daohaus/rydkZOVV9)
- Explores social relations (soft gov) and on-chain txns (hard gov) through the exchange of sub-DAOs as members of a federated DAO
- Experiments with different visual configurations of how the org is formed.

#### Gitcoin UG

- [Details of this template here.](https://hackmd.io/@TravisWyche/rkNpqZfmc)
- A contributor wants to submit a change to the collectively owned canon (metadata, asset) of a DAO while being positively incentivized in a way that anticipates and avoids mining, negative gaming, and other perverse/negative incentives.
- Points towards:
    - collective ownership of a Web3 publication
    - distributed ownership of IP across DAOs, product teams, or creative initiatives
    - open-source steering of DAO lore (important ramifications for culture layer and marketing initiatives)
:::

:::spoiler **WarGame Scenario Submission Form**

- What DH component is being tested?
- What is the theater where the scenario takes place?
- What defines success and failure?
- What is the ancitipated outcome?
- How much time is needed to gather accurate results?
- How many times should the simulation be run to gather enough/appropriate data?
- Are there any metaphorical, allegorical, role-playing elements you have in mind for this scenario? (optional)
- Is there any additional context or complexity that we should be aware of?
:::

![](https://i.imgur.com/RgqxoVD.jpg)
