On Tue, Sep 10, 2019 at 4:20 PM Reuben Staley <reuben.sta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 9/10/19 4:10 AM, Timon Walshe-Grey wrote:> I do wonder if maybe "all > the interlocking cogs... turning fine" is part of the problem. In > real-life political systems, things keep changing because people still > feel that they are inadequate or unjust, or because there are current > events that need to be responded to. But in Agora, there seems to be a > general consensus that the current system is fit for purpose and needs > no major improvements or alterations. So, naturally, nothing much tends > to change with the "core" rules, and instead we've been distracting > ourselves with a series of sub-games. > > > > Perhaps it's time to deliberately tinkering some of the core rules and > see what happens? > > Right, this is exactly how I envisioned C&B. A deliberate change to the > core ruleset. Economic systems, despite shifting due to the needs of the > rest of the rules, are still a core part of the game. C&B would change > up the process a little bit, perhaps spurring a change to the rest of > the ruleset. Do you want me to expand this to more parts of the core > ruleset? I have plenty of ideas for that. > Economic systems really aren’t a core part of the game. We’ve functioned without them before. Yes, you still need some way of tracking who can do what, but it doesn’t always take the form of a currency. You could yank the economic system and to the best of my knowledge everything would still basically function, apart from like zombies, which are also non-core. > > >For example, I know from archives that proposals tend to oscillate > between "free and accessible to everyone" and "gated behind game > mechanics". When I registered a year and a half ago, proposals cost a > nominal fee, and now they're totally unrestricted - so we've gone through a > phase of direct democracy. What would people think about changing that? > > For the record, I've never really been completely on-board with infinite > completely free proposals for all. I would love if someone brought > proposal fees back. Who do infinite free proposals hurt? The only people I can think of who might be adversely affected are the Promotor and the Assessor (if the proposals are really bad, they’ll never hit the Rulekeepor, and extra the amount of work for voters isn’t big). As Promotor, I can say that I’d much rather track extra proposals than track whether proposals have been pended. Does it bother the H. Assessor? If not, we’re gating proposals out of an abstract opinion that they ought to be gated rather than because it’s in anyone’s interest. -Aris
