Please find below the
This proposal seems overly complicated for the average user. This seems like something that would be of interest to engineers and professionals, but not the general public -- and while the gaming approach is interesting, I'm not convinced that the average user would find this useful for their own home or local area -- as fixing a virtual space doesn't necessarily lead to actual improvements on someone's home or watershed. Not sure how unique this would be as cat modeling software already exists to help engineers and others understand what risks would be like for the future. The gaming aspect is new, but again, it's unclear how average users would be able to really contribute solutions that engineers and others aren't already doing or developing. I would need to see a more detailed project plan with costs to advance to the next round.
While gaming is an interesting approach, and would be fun and educational for students, the process seems overly complicated and time intensive before results would be achieved. Simplifying the gaming structure, number of phases and complexity of parties needing to be involved would help streamline the experience and could result in more impact in a shorter timeline. There is no guarantee that these solutions would be financed by investors, employed by companies or governments. However, the technology, if developed, could be a valuable resource for companies and governments to explore technological and infrastructure solutions that could lead to policy innovations. The long-tail approach of this idea is great -- allowing everyone to contribute their expertise, creativity and skills to solve this crucial problem. Sometimes the best solutions come from the least expected places.
Nov 5, 2017
Primary changes happen in the "Actions" category beginning with Levels 1, 2 and 3. There are also significant changes under "Costs" and "Timeline".
Please note that there is a footnote error regarding Nick Wynekin's drawing in the Who Will Take These Actions? section. I was unable to get into the drawing section and correct it. It is correct in the footnotes listing.