On 4/11/23 10:22, Yachay Wayllukuq via agora-discussion wrote:
I don't see it that way. There are plenty of nomics that have played for extended periods of time with no payment for being the author of a proposal.
We don't have to play the same way other nomics do.
Gamifying Proposal-passing like that gamifies both Proposal-making and Proposal-voting. This is especially the case with Radiance where having one person gain 4 Radiance could mean that everyone else "loses" up to 49 Radiance; so control of other players' Radiance seems especially important if you're in the race for Radiance, or if you know that it's likely to be important for others.
The original version of radiance was ALL about passing proposals. It used to give more points. Maybe that's an argument for removing radiance entirely?
Proposals aren't just about improving the game anymore.
When we've had rewards for proposals before, we've also had "disinterested" proposals that don't get that reward. Thus, if a proposal really looks like it's "just for points" it can be safely voted AGAINST and told to resubmit as disinterested.
The proposals in this batch aren't like that. Mine at the very least tried to be comprehensive of all the changes I wanted to make to improve the game. If you have disagreements about their merits I understand, but voting no against everything because it gives rewards means we just don't get to do anything.
-- nix Prime Minister, Herald
