Lived experience-based Weighted Voting Mechanism Design
{"type": "project", "title": "Lived experience-based Weighted Voting Mechanism Design", "logoImg": "bafkreiggeitb2edxttj3q2qn7amwmxldsgirvmvb7pdq53amgap3dbxmp4", "website": "https://x.com/womxninweb3_TE?t=KbtVB9sZr8ytpx0jMznL3w&s=03", "createdAt": 1713302277936, "credentials": {"twitter": {"type": ["VerifiableCredential"], "proof": {"jws": "eyJhbGciOiJFZERTQSIsImNyaXQiOlsiYjY0Il0sImI2NCI6ZmFsc2V9..Q4srogNOztdNf8vH26XD63JFrnWIBX6F9H-dyXdzlExzP_FTfntPh7tKHAxokQw3YV96orHz_07vZxULfuK-Cw", "type": "Ed25519Signature2018", "created": "2024-04-16T21:16:42.190Z", "proofPurpose": "assertionMethod", "verificationMethod": "did:key:z6MkghvGHLobLEdj1bgRLhS4LPGJAvbMA1tn2zcRyqmYU5LC#z6MkghvGHLobLEdj1bgRLhS4LPGJAvbMA1tn2zcRyqmYU5LC"}, "issuer": "did:key:z6MkghvGHLobLEdj1bgRLhS4LPGJAvbMA1tn2zcRyqmYU5LC", "@context": ["https://www.w3.org/2018/credentials/v1"], "issuanceDate": "2024-04-16T21:16:42.190Z", "expirationDate": "2024-07-15T21:16:42.190Z", "credentialSubject": {"id": "did:pkh:eip155:1:0xa1F01E5cC9562ed061B0e3ddDd3e82Ef69A1CebD", "hash": "v0.0.0:d6XjBLdqWvw++DfHaJxjAno2Kb52W7zDdCDC2W0gSuA=", "@context": [{"hash": "https://schema.org/Text", "provider": "https://schema.org/Text"}], "provider": "ClearTextTwitter#womxninweb3_TE"}}}, "description": "We want to design a mechanism capturing lived experience as a form of value as part of token based governance. Currently, reputation-based weighted voting allows a party with provable expertise in a topic, greater weight and decision making power. \n\nWe will research the concept of a ‘Lived experience-based weighted voting mechanism'. This concept could enable a DAO member, engaging in the process of techno-reflexivity to consciously acknowledge their lack of lived experience in an issue and delegate their vote to somebody with lived experience in an area, topic or challenge.\n\nThe potential impact of this research is far reaching and spans a number of existing research concepts:\n\n1. System Resilience (Meadows, 2008)\nEnsuring that systems are built/governed by people from diverse backgrounds helps to ensure that there are people with different ways of thinking ,which in turn increases system resilience.\n\n2. Techno-reflexivity (Nabben & Zargham, 2020)\nDesiging this mechanism will begin to normalise the practice of techno-reflexivity - ‘a methodological tool to help developers recognise and address their inherent biases during the design and development phases of technology' - across the field of decentralised economy design.\n\n2. Fairness/Bias in AI (Barocas, Hardt & Narayanan, 2023)\nThere is a growing amount of research in AI demonstrating that there doesn’t always need to be a tradeoff between utility and safeguarding/inclusion. This project can continue to normalise the inclusion of ethical practices in technology design and development.\n\n3. Facilitating DAO collaboration (Impact Networks, Ehrlichman, 2021)\nCentring lived experience as a type of 'reputation' increases an individual's stake in the system, builds trust between DAO members and facilitates actor alignment with the long term health of the system.\n\n**Where are we now?**\n\nWe are currently running a Token Engineering study group for womxninweb3, made up of 40+ female and non-binary members leveraging the power of peer learning to increase representation in the space.\n\nWe are writing on the topic:\n- [Centring Lived Experience in Token Engineering](https://paragraph.xyz/@womxninweb3.te/centring-lived-experience-in-token-engineering)\n\n- [Applying the concept of technoreflexivity across four levels](https://paragraph.xyz/@womxninweb3.te/applying-the-concept-of-techno-reflexivity-across-four-levels)\n\n- [Intersectionality, Lived Experience & System Design](https://twitter.com/womxninweb3_TE/status/1780235451195953507?t=viGYhj7KBgixqMFMMyTyzw&s=19)\n\n**How does the project support Public Goods?**\nDesigning this mechanism will attract more diversity in the space of decentralised governance. Increasing diversity will support the development and design of public goods/systems which have a more holistic impact on society. \n\n**What are the funds for?**\n\nWe currently volunteer our time to learn about Token Engineering. We want to build our research and mechanism design portfolio. The more funds we raise, the more time we will be able to spend formally working on this project and designing an effective mechanism to normalise inclusive cultures in decentralised economies.\n\nBelow is our plan for the project:\n\n**1. Literature Review**\n\nOutput: A comprehensive review paper or report that synthesises the existing literature on token-based governance, techno-reflexivity, and the role of lived experience in decision-making processes and allows to include lived experience in terms of systems thinking.. This document should highlight gaps in the current research and establish a solid foundation for developing a new governance model. This document should highlight gaps in the current research and establish a solid foundation for developing a new governance model.\n\n**2. Conceptual Framework Development**\n\nOutput: A detailed conceptual framework document that outlines how lived experience can be incorporated into token-based governance. This document should include an official definition of the term 'lived experience', theoretical underpinnings, and potential mechanisms for integrating lived experience into voting processes.\n\n**3. Qualitative Research**\n\nOutput: A collection of detailed case study reports and a summary of insights from interviews and focus groups. These documents should provide qualitative evidence and diverse perspectives on the feasibility and potential impacts of lived experience-based voting.\n\n**4. Model Development**\n\nOutput: A technical white paper or a series of model specifications that describe the proposed voting mechanisms. This should include algorithms, simulation models, and any software code developed for testing the models. The document should also outline scenarios for implementation and expected behaviours of the voting mechanism under different conditions. At this stage we will identify existing solutions to build on.\n\n**5. Empirical Testing**\n\nOutput: A dataset comprising the results of prototype tests and simulations, accompanied by a detailed analysis report. This report should assess the performance of the voting mechanism, document any observed biases or inefficiencies, and provide statistical evidence on the model’s impact on governance outcomes.\n\n**6. Evaluation and Refinement**\n\nOutput: An evaluation report that includes feedback from stakeholders, analysis of iterative tests, and recommendations for improving the voting mechanism. This should be a dynamic document, updated through multiple iterations as the model is refined based on real-world feedback and testing.\n\n**Who is in our team?**\n\nMadhuri Rahman - https://www.linkedin.com/in/madhuri-rahman\n\nAlex Zaremba - https://www.linkedin.com/in/zarembaalex\n\nLena Hierzi - https://linkedin.com/in/lena-hierzi-8221151ab\n", "logoImgData": {}, "projectTwitter": "womxninweb3_TE"}