On 10/25/17 11:52, Kerim Aydin wrote: > People don't spend to buy others' votes. They just don't. I have > theories as to why, but while I've seen many many people set up contracts, > etc. to sell votes, over years of observed play they rarely make more > than a few shinies here and there. A bought vote might help one little > scam/victory proposal here and there, but it's not a basis for gameplay.
1) There's enough pre-discussion that few proposals narrowly pass, so a single vote is rarely relevant. 2) There's rarely a clear reward for a proposal passing, so it rarely pays off. 2a) If the proposal passing does have a payoff for you, there's a good chance you don't want to signal that. 3) It's ethically squicky to some people (myself included). 3a) It's tempting to think players in a game will be more 'unethical' because it's, well, a game. But players seem to act fairly high-minded in routine play, probably because of the implicit social contract of 'play'. The only time people tend to do ethically grey things is when it is a clear route to a win.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
