Role-Specific Prep Memo — Developer (Experienced)

Session: 1 Priority: Medium — most experienced member; prep value is in group translation and camp knowledge-sharing, not personal orientation

Person / Role

Full-stack web software developer. Experience: two regional Burning Man events (direct prior attendance at regionals).

Existing Strengths

Event model fluency: Already understands the 10 Principles, decommodification, radical self-reliance, MOOP, gifting culture, ranger structure. Does not need to be oriented to the basic event model.

Infrastructure knowledge: Has run a camp at a regional burn, which means water management, gray water, shade, strike day, and camp operations are understood from experience.

Navigation of the social environment: Knows what to expect from the crowd, what expressions of radical inclusion and self-expression look like in practice, and how to move through the event comfortably.

Failure mode catalog: Has already experienced first-time surprises, failed plans, and things that worked. This is the group's most valuable pre-event resource.

Expert curse in group communication: There's a risk of explaining the event in ways that assume too much familiarity or that make the event sound more extreme or stranger than it is, either over-emphasizing weirdness (which may create anxiety for Amber) or under-emphasizing important differences (which may cause Matt to coast on festival experience). Translation quality matters.

Prior event may not be Lakes of Fire: The two prior regionals may be different events (different state, different culture, different scale). If so, some site-specific details may not transfer cleanly. Lakes of Fire has its own culture, community, and operational norms that differ from other regionals. This should be verified.

Taking on too much. The developer may default to owning everything because it's easier than explaining it to others. This is a mistake for a multi-person group. The right play is role-appropriate delegation: Matt owns infrastructure, the developer owns event culture and protocol knowledge, Amber owns group social cohesion.

Forgetting what it was like to not know. The most valuable thing the experienced developer can do is remember what was actually surprising or difficult the first time and translate that clearly — not an idealized version, but the real version.

What They Should Understand in Advance

Their most valuable contribution is translation, not execution. Other group members have genuine skill in logistics and social coordination. The developer's unique value is event-specific knowledge that no one else in the group has.
Prior experience is at a different regional. If that's true, verify Lakes of Fire-specific norms: campsite sizes, amplified sound rules, gray water requirements, gate process, parking, and whether the developer's specific knowledge about prior events applies here.
This is a group trip, not a solo trip with companions. First-year group members need a guide who tells them how it actually works — socially, logistically, and psychologically — before they arrive.

What They Should Probably Own or Manage

Event culture and protocol knowledge: - Brief both Amber and Matt on what surprised them at their first event (before the trip, during a dedicated conversation) - Answer "what if X happens?" questions with actual prior experience - Be the group's go-to for "is this normal?" during the event

Site orientation planning: - Once the 2026 event guide or map is available, own learning the site well enough to give Amber and Matt a walking orientation on Day 1 arrival

Decision documentation: - Given their technical background, the developer may be the natural owner of the actual playbook maintenance — keeping this document updated before and after the event

Gray water and strike protocol: - From the LNT memo: the developer's prior camp experience should drive the gray water system design and the departure-day sweep design

What Support They Will Need

Access to Lakes of Fire 2026 event-specific materials once available (maps, guides, ticket communications)
Honest feedback from Amber and Matt about what they found confusing or unclear in the group conversations — so the translation is calibrated correctly

Open Questions

Are the two prior regionals Lakes of Fire specifically, or different events?
What went wrong at their first regional that they most want to prevent for this group?
What were the most genuinely good moments that they want to make sure Amber and Matt have access to?

Decision Memo

Keep: Developer owns event-culture translation role
Keep: Developer writes or maintains the group playbook artifacts
Assign: Developer leads "first-time translation" conversation with Amber and Matt — structured, specific, experience-grounded
Assign: Developer designs gray water system and departure protocol
Reject: Developer defaulting to solo ownership of logistics — Matt is better positioned for that
Revisit: Whether prior regional experience is Lakes of Fire or another event — this affects how much direct knowledge transfers