Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- marine_colab:game_on_experiment [2015-03-16 16:20] – nik
+++ marine_colab:game_on_experiment [2015-03-17 12:02] – nik
@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 ==== Game On Experiment ====
-(an experiment from the [[workshop_201503|March workshop]])
+(an [[experiment]] from the [[workshop_201503|March workshop]])
 ===Hypothesis / Challenge===
@@ Line 12: / Line 12: @@
 [[https://www.flickr.com/photos/foam/16211976993/|full size image]]
-  * finding previous examples of where it did/didn't work
+To begin with, collecting examples of previous public engagements where public engagement did or didn't work (e.g. make poverty history, fish fight, whaling moratorium, ozone layer depletion, etc+) in some cases campaigns are not hung on the main issue, but use lateral issues. timing is very important (e.g. elections, public consultations)
-  * make poverty history, fish fight, whaling moratorium, etc+
-  * don't need to hang a campaign on the main issue, can use lateral issues
+As an example or test case to use as the basis for our experiment, we would use the review of the Habitats and Wild birds directive. We will set up a game or simulation of the legislative process to compare different inputs, player engagement and outcomes. By running through several iterations of the game, different modes and timing of public engagment can be compared.
-  * timing is very important (e.g. elections, public consultations)
-  * review of the Habitats and Wild birds directive
+design steps;
-    * decided use this as the basis for an experiment
+  * map existing legislative process into something like a flow-chart
-    * experiment: set up a game/simulation of the legislative process
+  * survey existing simulations and work related to simulations of EU legislative process
-    * look at different inputs, players, outcomes
+  * design a simulation (based on the results of first step)
-    * use several iterations of the game to compare different modes of public engagements
+  * play simulation (with various strategies, etc) possibly updating the design
-  * steps;
+  * document analyse games
-    * map existing legislative process
-    * look for existing simulations
+needs;
-    * design simulation
+  * knowledge of legislative process
-    * play simulation (with various strategies, etc)
+  * simulation design
-    * documentation & analysis
+  * recruit players
-  *  needs
+  * players
-    *  knowledge of legislative process
+  * documenting game iterations
-    * simulation design
+  * evaluate strategies
-    * recruit players
-    * players
+offers
-    * documenting game iterations
+  * SL: analysis
-    * evaluate strategies
+  * SL: knowledge regarding step 1
+  * ?: brainstorming
+  * MVL: the voting guy - cities
+  * MVL: coalition building & outreach
+  * ?: recruit potential players
+  * ?: oceans world bank as example
+  * catarina: help review game desing and rules
+  * foam: contact with game designers
+  * amy: help find players and be a sounding board
 ===Progress===