|
| 1 | +@epic:value_scanner |
| 2 | +@user_type:adult |
| 3 | +@governance_layer:community |
| 4 | +@related_users:parent,worker,educator,caregiver,community_member |
| 5 | +@related_layers:neighborhood,municipality,workplace_organizational |
| 6 | +@elohim_agents:personal_agent,community_elohim |
| 7 | + |
| 8 | +Feature: Community Layer Value Recognition for Adult |
| 9 | + As an adult participating in community governance |
| 10 | + Operating at the community governance layer |
| 11 | + I want my care contributions to create community resilience |
| 12 | + So that community resources and leadership reflect demonstrated care work |
| 13 | + |
| 14 | + Background: |
| 15 | + Given the Elohim Protocol is operational |
| 16 | + And the adult user "Sarah" is registered in the system |
| 17 | + And Sarah actively participates in community care economy |
| 18 | + And the community governance context is active |
| 19 | + And the community_elohim coordinates community-level care |
| 20 | + And community includes schools, food cooperatives, civic organizations |
| 21 | + |
| 22 | + Scenario: Community care contributions qualify Sarah for leadership |
| 23 | + Given Sarah has accumulated substantial care contributions |
| 24 | + And community leadership positions require demonstrated commitment |
| 25 | + When community selects leaders |
| 26 | + Then Sarah's quantified care work should be visible evidence |
| 27 | + And her school involvement should be tracked |
| 28 | + And her food cooperative participation should be recognized |
| 29 | + And her community organizing should be valued |
| 30 | + And leadership should go to those who demonstrate care, not just those who talk |
| 31 | + And care economy should create accountability in community governance |
| 32 | + |
| 33 | + Scenario: School involvement recognized as substantial care work |
| 34 | + Given Sarah is actively involved in her children's school |
| 35 | + And she volunteers in classrooms, organizes events, advocates for policies |
| 36 | + When community care contributions are tracked |
| 37 | + Then the community_elohim should quantify Sarah's school involvement |
| 38 | + And volunteer hours should be valued as care work |
| 39 | + And parent advocacy should be recognized as community contribution |
| 40 | + And school participation should give Sarah voice in educational governance |
| 41 | + And care for education should be visible and valued |
| 42 | + |
| 43 | + Scenario: Food cooperative participation builds community food security |
| 44 | + Given Sarah participates in community food cooperative |
| 45 | + And she contributes labor to collective food purchasing |
| 46 | + When food cooperative operates |
| 47 | + Then the community_elohim should track Sarah's contributions |
| 48 | + And it should coordinate cooperative logistics |
| 49 | + And it should connect Sarah to other food security advocates |
| 50 | + And cooperative should reduce costs for all members |
| 51 | + And community food security should be built through care economy |
| 52 | + And Sarah's contributions should be recognized and valued |
| 53 | + |
| 54 | + Scenario: Community care tokens enable resource access based on contribution |
| 55 | + Given Sarah has accumulated care tokens through community participation |
| 56 | + And community resources are allocated based on care contributions |
| 57 | + When Sarah needs community support |
| 58 | + Then her care tokens should give her access to resources |
| 59 | + And community mutual aid should be available |
| 60 | + And support should be based on demonstrated contribution |
| 61 | + And care economy should function as community resource system |
| 62 | + And Sarah's care work should have tangible value |
| 63 | + |
| 64 | + Scenario: Community organizations coordinate through care economy principles |
| 65 | + Given Sarah participates in multiple community organizations |
| 66 | + And these organizations share care economy values |
| 67 | + When community organizations coordinate activities |
| 68 | + Then the community_elohim should facilitate coordination |
| 69 | + And it should prevent Sarah from being overcommitted |
| 70 | + And it should enable meaningful contribution across organizations |
| 71 | + And community sector should adopt care economy practices |
| 72 | + And organizational effectiveness should improve through coordination |
| 73 | + |
| 74 | + Scenario: Community policy advocacy informed by care economy data |
| 75 | + Given Sarah advocates for community policy changes |
| 76 | + And data about care work supports policy arguments |
| 77 | + When Sarah engages in advocacy |
| 78 | + Then the community_elohim should provide aggregated care economy data |
| 79 | + And Sarah should show that care work is substantial and invisible |
| 80 | + And policy discussions should be informed by actual care patterns |
| 81 | + And advocacy should be strengthened by quantified evidence |
| 82 | + And care economy data should transform policy debates |
| 83 | + |
| 84 | + Scenario: Community mutual aid network provides support during crisis |
| 85 | + Given Sarah or community members may face crises |
| 86 | + And traditional systems often fail to provide adequate support |
| 87 | + When Sarah experiences job loss, health emergency, or family crisis |
| 88 | + Then the community_elohim should connect her to mutual aid network |
| 89 | + And support should be immediate, dignified, and effective |
| 90 | + And community should function as safety net |
| 91 | + And Sarah's previous contributions should enable access to help |
| 92 | + And mutual aid should be reciprocal and community-based |
| 93 | + |
| 94 | + Scenario: Community care economy includes diverse cultural approaches |
| 95 | + Given Sarah's community includes diverse cultural backgrounds |
| 96 | + And different cultures have different care economy traditions |
| 97 | + When community care economy operates |
| 98 | + Then the community_elohim should respect cultural diversity |
| 99 | + And it should accommodate different care practices |
| 100 | + And it should not impose single cultural framework |
| 101 | + And diverse approaches should be honored and integrated |
| 102 | + And community care economy should be culturally adaptive |
| 103 | + |
| 104 | + Scenario: Preventing Sarah's overcommitment through community coordination |
| 105 | + Given Sarah is highly engaged in community |
| 106 | + And she tends to say yes to too many requests |
| 107 | + When community organizations ask Sarah to contribute |
| 108 | + Then the community_elohim should track her total commitments |
| 109 | + And it should warn Sarah when she's approaching overcommitment |
| 110 | + And it should help her maintain sustainable participation |
| 111 | + And community should benefit from Sarah's long-term engagement |
| 112 | + And burnout should be prevented through coordination |
| 113 | + |
| 114 | + Scenario: Community resource sharing reduces individual costs at scale |
| 115 | + Given community members have complementary needs and resources |
| 116 | + And collective action can reduce costs significantly |
| 117 | + When community organizes resource sharing |
| 118 | + Then the community_elohim should coordinate tool libraries |
| 119 | + And it should facilitate skill sharing networks |
| 120 | + And it should organize bulk purchasing cooperatives |
| 121 | + And community members should benefit economically from cooperation |
| 122 | + And care economy should provide material benefits, not just recognition |
| 123 | + |
| 124 | + Scenario: Community care contributions connect to municipal governance |
| 125 | + Given Sarah's community care work is substantial |
| 126 | + And municipal policy affects community well-being |
| 127 | + When municipal governance decisions are made |
| 128 | + Then Sarah's care contributions should give her voice |
| 129 | + And community care economy data should inform municipal policy |
| 130 | + And care work should be recognized at municipal level |
| 131 | + And Sarah's advocacy should carry weight based on demonstrated contribution |
| 132 | + And care economy should scale from community to municipal governance |
| 133 | + |
| 134 | + Scenario: Community privacy protects members while enabling coordination |
| 135 | + Given community care economy involves data about many people |
| 136 | + And privacy must be protected rigorously |
| 137 | + When community care patterns are tracked |
| 138 | + Then the community_elohim should only share aggregated data |
| 139 | + And individual household details should remain private |
| 140 | + And Sarah should control what community sees about her family |
| 141 | + And community coordination should not require privacy sacrifice |
| 142 | + And data should serve community well-being, not surveillance |
| 143 | + |
| 144 | + Scenario: Community care economy demonstrates alternative to extraction economics |
| 145 | + Given Sarah's community has adopted care economy practices |
| 146 | + And mainstream economics devalue care work |
| 147 | + When community care economy becomes visible |
| 148 | + Then it should demonstrate that alternatives to capitalism are viable |
| 149 | + And it should show care work creates real value |
| 150 | + And it should inspire other communities to adopt similar practices |
| 151 | + And Sarah's community should serve as model |
| 152 | + And care economy transformation should spread through demonstrated success |
0 commit comments