Hey y’all,
I wanted to share a few reflections about the purpose and direction of this research quest I’ve been designing.
From the beginning, the goal has been to create something the community can appropriate and evolve — not a top-down project, but a shared framework that others can fork and refine. So i’m intentionally focusing on pattern language and alignment over ownership or control.
One thing I’ve been reconsidering is the use of Raid Guild-style branding and the term “Raid” itself. At first, it felt like a natural connection — helping bridge the Cookie Jar Research concept with @T_W’s Castles & Raids, and also with the creators of the tool we’re using. But it’s become clear that this framing might cause confusion, especially around the expectations it sets.
Updates I’m considering:
1. Extending the timeline + broadening participation
Instead of selecting a few participants, I’d like to open up the process:
- Mint a Cookie Jar Research token to acknowledge contribution.
Anyone who meaningfully contributes to the sprint can claim it. - Let the community propose roles instead of predefining them.
Each role would have:- a symbolic name (e.g. Keeper, Driver)
- a purpose (ideal vision)
- minimal responsibilities
- relevant artifacts
- Expand meta-items into onchain signals.
Example: use a Sarafu pool to let people mint vouchers. These + the research token could be swapped for goods/services.
2. Renaming the sprint
To avoid branding overlap with Raid Guild, I propose:
Cookie Jar Research Raid → Cookie Jar Research Quest
Would love to hear your thoughts. Open to further input before we update the call and structure.
See you on the space, peace. 