Marks are (mostly) useless. Some equity cases have been initiated on trivial mark transfers, but I would like to see equity cases on real mark transfers. These will not occur until marks become more common.
The only reason for the current high numbers of marks is the blue scam-inflation and the initial proposal's mark assignment. Those aside, let's look at the speed of mark gain: (r): About 70 proposals have been distributed in the last month. Assuming each player gets 2 red marks for each, that's 140 marks/month. Slow if you're converting to VCs, but at least reasonable, and enough to make up for the Red Mark loss. (g): One per month, for offices with no report. All actual offices have reports (AFAIK), causing 1 *VC* gain per month, with no way of converting that into marks. (b): Only about 35 CFJs have been made in the past month (this is approximate). Therefore, ignoring special cases, which are probably made up for by the losses, that's 35 marks distributed among the players. Or about 2 per first-class player per month, on average. Red is okay, but green and blue marks need drastic increases in payout, and we need more colors. Two usable colors of marks is boring. There should be more interesting and esoteric ways to earn Marks than VCs, not the other way around. And more ways to spend them. Even 140 Marks per month is equivalent to 1.4 VCs; we could increase that, but I don't think that Marks should be useful just for converting to VCs. Rather, I'd like to see actions that debit Marks directly (which maybe cannot trigger a VC-to-Mark conversion, or require types of Marks that do not have VC equivalents, so VCs aren't the principal source of marks for spending). There is no proposal in this message, because I am suggesting a lot of rule text that does not currently exist, but I might come up with a proto when I can. Of course the other option is to repeal Marks. Thoughts?
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
