On Jan 14, 2017, at 2:26 AM, nichdel <nich...@gmail.com> wrote: > Amend the rule titled "Economics" by replacing: > > Any attempt by a player to PAY any amount that would make > eir own balance negative is INEFFECTIVE, rules to the contrary > notwithstanding. > > With: > > Any attempt to PAY any amount that would make any player's balance > negative is INEFFECTIVE, rules to the contrary notwithstanding.
Any player’s or organization’s balance, I think? > [As is, it looks like any rule that would involve someone or something > making another player pay (such as a punishment, tax, or organization > rule) would potentially make eir balance negative] > > Amend the rule titled "Payday" to read, in full: > > Payrate is an office switch, tracked by the ADoP, with a > default value of 10 and possible values of positive integers. > > At the start of each month, if Agora's Balance is not 0 or less, > Agora SHALL pay each player 10 shinies. Immediately afterward, if > Agora's Balance is not 0 or less, Agora SHALL pay each player who > holds an office the office's Payrate value, in ascending order of > Payrate (breaking ties alphabetically by office) until all are > paid or paying the next office would leave Agora's balance at 0 > or less. > > [Now everybody gets a basic stipend OR nobody gets a basic stipend, and > then offices get paid as possible. No mechanism included to adjust > payrate. Also the Secretary simply reports on rather than doing, which > makes it simpler and potentially less scammable.] Thank you! I had a scam in mind for that, involving issuing as many Paydays as Agora had money for, back to back on Feb 1st. I don’t think that would have harmed anyone, but I do think it would’ve been legal. Making this an automatic action that appears in a report, rather than a manual action that must be done at a particular time but has no apparent limits on how often it can be done, fixes that, I think. > Enact a new rule (P=3) titled "Shiny Supply Level" which reads: > > Supply Level is a singleton switch tracked by the Secretary whose > possible values are positive integers. When the Supply Level is > changed, Agora's Balance is increased or decreased such that all > Balances add up to the Supply Level. > > The Supply Level is 1000. > > [Weird wording is to ensure that changing Supply Level corrects any > imbalances that may exist (shinies created or destroyed elsewhere). This > makes changing this switch a simple proposal based action.] In effect, > Supply Level is a singleton switch, tracked by the Secretary, whose only > possible value is 1000. Let me make sure I understand the intent: if this only defined a switch, then proposals of AI=1 could adjust it. Because it’s in a rule with P=3, only proposals with AI=3 or higher can adjust the switch, and only if they also adjust the rule text? In any case, if the “pay” action is zero-sum, then this is formally unnecessary, but almost certainly a good idea, and it generalizes well. It might be nice to have a mechanism for trueing up Agora’s economy to the Supply Level, though, without changing it. If someone invents a way to mint or destroy shinies, it probably shouldn’t take an AI=3 proposal that adds or removes at least one shiny just to restore the status quo. What about allowing the Secretary to true up Agora’s account in a similar fashion, with notice or with N consent? -o
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
