So, in my earlier post I argued for linking the Real World, the Web, and the Virtual to create a dynamic, interactive, ecosystem. I've tried to expand that a bit and apply it to the projects that are currently under development (Mark's idea, Liz and Bobby's scripting, and Tim's Mayan ballcourt). Please let me know what you think.
Elaine Raybourn sets up a four-part framework for her notion of an Intercultural Communication Framework (
www.sandia.gov/adaptive-training-systems/papers/Raybourn%20I-ITSEC%202672%2011-17-%202006_citation.pdf), which can be used to produce simulations within which users can have “Crucible Experiences” or “a defining moment that unleashes abilities, forces crucial choices, and sharpens focus. It teaches the person who he or she is.”
The IC Framework contains four components:
Interaction - Dynamic Content, Personas, Roles
Narrative - Scenarios
Place - Environment
Emergent Culture - Assessment, Feedback
I have taken a more detailed look at the question of roles and how those might tie into a dynamic interactive ecosystem. However, before the roles are elaborated, the ecosystem effect may be enhanced through Collective Intelligence or Collective Decision-making.
What follows is a survey of web-based Collective Decision Making Systems (CDMS) by Jennifer Watkins and Marko Rodriguez (
www.soe.ucsc.edu/~okram/papers/cdms-taxonomy.pdf), some of which might be expanded upon by rolling them into an ecosystem of interactions or them with Social Simulations. Each CDMS process is shown on the left with the aggregation mechanism on the right.
Document ranking (PageRank aggregation)
Folksonomy (collaborative tagging aggregation)
Recommender system (collaborative filtering aggregation)
Voting system (plurality aggregation)
Open source software (collaborative development aggregation)
Wiki (collaborative editing aggregation)
Prediction market (market scoring rule aggregation)
All of the following roles may not be necessary. Also, there may be quite a bit of overlap between who is playing these roles. With that said, the ecosystem roles can be described:
Framers
The role of the Framer(s) is to set the overall agenda for the ecosystem. “What is it for? What are we doing here?” A CDMS may be used here to determine the purpose of the ecosystem.
Modders
Modders should make changes to the rules of the environment within the constraints of the overall vision set by the Framers. The Modders ask the questions, “What is the ecosystem good for?” and “What are its limits?” The Modder role may simply have a user changing the environment through simple interactions or may include scripting or code addition/alteration. The modding role/effect may manifest itself as the aggregate behavior of the Active or Passive players—in other words, emergent.
Active PlayersActive players experience and act on the environment from within the environment. The relationship between Active and Passive players is relative. If the environment in question is Second Life, the Active player contingent will be in-world and the Passive contingent out-of-world. One might say that Active players are the primary interactors.
Passive PlayersPassive players act on the environment from outside of it. If Second Life is the environment, Passive players will interact with it through text messages or email.
Art Education - Mark's Idea
Here are some thoughts pertaining to Mark’s Art Education idea.
Framers
I assume the framing statement is “to teach the principles of visual design to children.”
Modders
The modding role could include the child-users choosing which teaching module to view, thus altering the configuration of module presentations to suit their interests. You may even frame the modules as a narrative (a configurable fairytale perhaps?). A CDMS might be used here to allow the children to vote on the module order.
Active Players
The in-world Second Life participants would experience the design principle modules close-up. Is the module in 3D?
Passive PlayersPassive players could experience the modules by sending text messages or emails to the CDMS system for voting purposes and view snapshots of the live activity in-world on the DMA website.
Effects Idea - Liz and BobbyAfter viewing some of the scripting effects Liz created, I thought there is probably a way they could be linked together to form an ecosystem. Perhaps Passive players could be linked into the process via a reversal of Bobby’s microblogging script where posts from outside Second Life appear in one of Liz’s scripted objects. Of course, before any sort of ecosystem planning could go forward, the mission/framing statement would have to be created. Liz? Bobby? What kind of Crucible Experience do you want users to have?
Mayan World - Tim and Russell?Here are some thoughts regarding Tim’s Mayan ballcourt.
FramersI am assuming the mission statement is “to teach users about the mechanics of the Mayan ballgame.”
ModdersA CDMS system could be used by users to choose features of the game-play as superficial as the color of the ball used to the difficulty (as determined by the size of the ring/hoop) or bounciness of the ball. Perhaps another element of the rule-set to be decided would be if the losing team (or winning) would have its avatars “sacrificed.” Perhaps a script will remove the losing avatars and replace them with less desirable ones (skeletons?). The “killed” avatars might be held ransom, with the losers having to pay a certain number of Lindens to get them back.
Active Players
Active players would be in-world, kicking the ball and so forth.
Passive PlayersPassive players might play the role of the “gods”, influencing game in a way similar to the Avatar Traps exhibit--widening or narrowing the width of the ballcourt or altering the bounciness of the ball or some other facet of the world.
