>That's fair enough, I was mainly thinking of ways like utilising contracts and offering wincon progress or selling your vote, and in general I feel like people don't really use what's there >as much as we possibly could?
I completely concur with this. We've had/do have so many systems that would work if people (myself absolutely included) were more interested in them. I mean, there's currently a vote-buying pledge and a vote-buying contract but nobody's using either. I plan to create a couple of contracts over the coming days but yeah guys...I feel like maybe we (me included) should sit back for a bit and try & utilize the current systems to their full potential. On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 5:37 PM, Madeline <j...@iinet.net.au> wrote: > That's fair enough, I was mainly thinking of ways like utilising contracts > and offering wincon progress or selling your vote, and in general I feel > like people don't really use what's there as much as we possibly could? My > apologies for coming across harsher than I should have. One thing that > might be reasonable is increasing the authorship and pend rewards to be > more than the pend cost together? And for people looking at tax systems, a > luxury tax (only targeting players with particularly high shiny balances) > might be the best way of going about it. Hopefully as people create more > contracts ways for the currency to flow will increase, but that depends on > coming up with those ideas at all. Not to mention how loath everyone > generally is to sacrifice any part of their free agency... it's a difficult > question to answer, but I'll certainly be looking into ways to at least do > something myself. > > > > On 2017-10-25 17:25, Owen Jacobson wrote: > > > On Oct 25, 2017, at 1:51 AM, Madeline <j...@iinet.net.au> wrote: > > I'm not the only one who feels like this is a horribly designed rule? For > a start, basic income is designed to overcome the cost of living, which in > Agora is 0. You could also argue its purpose is already fulfilled by Action > Points, which are far simpler, far more effective, and far less damaging to > the economy as a whole. In addition, this rule is easy to scam (as has > already been pointed out), and making it impossible to run out of shinies > seems *very* counterproductive. It's also giving a lot of shinies to > inactives, and we're running up against the supply limit enough as it is. > Can we repeal it? It's not like there aren't other ways to get shinies, > even if you aren't an officeholder. > > > Some background: the statement "It's not like there aren't other ways to > get shinies, even if you aren't an officeholder” has not been held to be > true, up to at least last month. The lack of reliable shiny sources for > non-officers for any amount of effort caused at least one player to pledge > to vote against any changes to the shiny rules unless they provided _some_ > form of income available to all players. We’ve had substantial hoards > develop - at one point, P.S.S. and I combined held a full fifth of all > Shinies, and P.S.S. is on track to beat that record singlehandedly. > > In particular, the primary ways to get shinies if you’re not an officer > are largely driven by speculating against the Floating Value, but the > cadence for speculation and the cadence for changes to the FV align badly. > Passing a proposal span up to three weeks even if all of the officers > involved act promptly - the remainder of the first week to propose and pend > it, one week of voting, and some fraction of the third week for the > proposal to be assessed. By experience, it’s nearly impossible to predict > the Floating Value three weeks out: pending cheap proposals (when the Pend > Cost is 1 sh., for example) is no guarantee of a return unless the FV both > goes up and _stays_ up for the following two weeks. > > AP, which you cite above, were enacted partly as a workaround for the > stagnation of the Shiny economy (or, if you prefer, a tacit acknowledgement > that it wasn’t functioning as an economy). I suspect there are a few > players who would push to repeal AP if the Shiny economy picks up again. > > I’ll freely admit that my solution is deeply flawed. Tapping half of the > shinies passing into Agora’s coffers damps the Floating Value fairly hard, > and I can’t see an obvious value for the Tax Rate that’s both sufficient to > provide a steady stream of shinies back into players’ hands and low enough > to keep Floating Value moving. I’m hopeful that I haven’t completely broken > it, but I’m also fearful that I have. Put forward a repeal if you like; I > can’t predict how voting will go, at this point, and I’m not even sure how > I’d vote. I do ask that you put forward something to replace it that > ensures that non-officers have a source of shinies that’s more reliable > than gambling, available in return for _some_ reasonable amount of effort. > > In conclusion, as my partner regularly reminds me, inventing money is > rude, and inevitably leads to these kinds of problems. > > -o > > -- >From V.J. Rada
