In creating the boxes I noticed that Artifacts are here, but Initiatives, Directors (category TBD), Supernodes, and other CresSperiment related things have their own categories. To make it easy for new users (and really everyone) to see all the categories related to playing the SourceCred game in one place, do we want to move all the CredSperiment related categories here to become sub-categories of the CredSperiment? And if so, will that be ok for the Cred flows?
Sure that makes sense to me. Though I have a feeling all of these will end up surviving the experimental stage and be used as tools we use to play our Cred game.
The grouping makes sense, but perhaps we’ll graduate from the term CredSperiment soon-ish.
I favor deprecating the term “CredSperiment”. Maybe there is value in having the forum organized so all the “gameplay mechanics” are under a subforum (payouts, initiatives, artifacts, etc) while “discussion” is separated. However, discussion is also part of the game.
We could just promote the CredSperiment sub-categories into top-level categories.
Then (I think) they won’t show up in the cool boxes lol
- I’d vote to keep the CredSperiment name as long as we’re still a train laying the rails as we go (like this fun video!). Once the basic SourceCred game mechanics and plugins are created and everything’s working, then we could rename it from the CredSperiment to, say… SourceCred! lol. For now, however, we’re still very much experimenting.
- Or, we could differentiate between the basic SourceCred protocol that measures raw activity and “just works” out of the box, and all the other stuff we’re building. The SourceCred is the protocol, but the CredSperiment is the game we play around and with the protocol.