It's worth noting that at least one side of the multidimensional political spectrum considers the last election to have been the site of a memewar. Thus, I think that it probably makes sense to try and figure out a way to model, in isolated, non-digital circumstances, the systems of memetic conflict in a circumstance that completely lacks the emotionally complex political landscape of the present. It also seems worth looking at the elements of memetic conflict that are distinct from 19th/20th/21st century style voting systems, and instead look at the methods by which individuals are influenced by crowd dynamics in their acquisition of memeplexes. It seems like it might be worth running a game/simulation to look at how some of this might play out. It also seems interesting to look at the ways that the situational information around given memes, rather than the actual
Thus, here are the rules for Dinner & A MemeWar, a quick game that I designed this morning while procrastinating fixing a cellphone and getting the hell out of dodge:
First, let us consider the following basic principals: The game is played with N players, which can be anything from three at the most basic, to a theoretically unbounded sum. The players exchange “memes” which are either authentic, or inauthentic. Gameplay takes place during a finite amount of time. The ability of the players to return the finite number of authentic memes at the end of the gameplay period determines the score of the individual players. Also, it's worth noting that none of the memes have any specific content to them. Functionally speaking, RarestPepe, InterSectIonaliZE, RetroPlatonism, all have the same characteristics.
The three scoring methods that seem to be the most interesting are as follows:
1. Voting : E.g. players feed memes as variables to the final count. Based on how many instances of memes are processed, individual memes win. Potentially, players are allowed to vote for multiple memes.
2. Rareness/Scarcity : Players win by having access the most minority authentic meme. Considering that this would regress to a scenario where the origin-point of a given authentic meme would simply intend to not share said meme, it’s likely most interesting to attempt to have it be the most minority meme within a limited distribution, e.g. one wins by being part of the bloc of the 5th most popular meme.
3. Catch ‘em All : Players win by stating the largest number of authentic memes, without stating any inauthentic memes.
Given that players are able to straight up lie, and spread inauthentic memes that aren't really in the running, this creates an interesting situation where individuals might need to develop moments of interpersonal trust. I'd conjecture that this might be an interesting model of a more opaque, chutzpah oriented game related to, but distinct from games like Avalon Hill's Diplomacy. It also might be intriguing to score with all three methods, or have a deterministic model where one of the three models is chosen based on player behavior.