On Sat, Nov 18, 2023 at 8:50 AM ais523 via agora-discussion < agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> * Democracy Gem (Assessor): As part of eir weekly duties, the Assessor > SHALL, and CAN by announcement, award 3 Change Gems to each player who > voted FOR on at least half the referenda that were resolved that week; > and SHALL NOT resolve referenda for the rest of the week after doing > so. > Despite others' dislike of this, I like this in particular. However, I will note that this is easily blocked by NO-OP proposals. I think we would want to amend the rules to somehow limit the number of proposals an author can have in the proposal pool, so that an author can only have one in the pool at a time. > * Trade Gem (Collector): Trade Participation is an untracked negative > boolean player switch. When a player pays a Stamp of another player's > type to perform an action defined in the rule "Stamps", eir Trade > Participation becomes True. As part of eir weekly duties, the Collector > SHALL, and CAN by announcement, grant each player whose Trade > Participation is True 3 Trade Gems; such a grant causes the player's > Trade Participation to become False. > I like this also in particular: this encourages the existing economy to do a thing. > * Vision Gem (Dream Keeper): As part of eir weekly duties, the Dream > Keepor SHALL, and CAN by announcement, award 5 Vision Gems to each > Mining Dreamer. [With rule 2675 amended to add the new Dream.] > I think this is great: right now the dreams are focused on 3 teams: power, wealth, and gardens. This would increase the spread. * Triumph Gem (Herald): Whenever a player wins the game, the Herald CAN > once by announcement, and SHALL within one month, grant em 25 Triumph > Gems. Whenever a player gains a Patent Title other than Champion, the > Herald CAN once by announcement, and SHALL within one month, grant em > 10 Triumph Gems. > I think this is lovely! Triumph gems would be scarce, but make winning more meaningful, and also encourage it a bit: if there's no triumph gems in the economy, you'll have to generate some somehow! > * Conspire Gem (Notary): As part of eir monthly duties, the Notary > SHALL, and CAN by announcement, grant 35 Conspire Gems to each Group > which has, or is tied for, the most, second-most or third-most parties. > [With the rules amended to define a Group, which is a special case of a > contract, designed so that each player can only be part of one Group at > a time.] > This sounds... difficult to implement, but still good. > * Idea Gem (Promotor): Proposal Participation is an untracked negative > boolean player switch. Whenever the Promotor distributes a proposal, > the Proposal Participation of its author and coauthors becomes True. At > the end of each week, the Proposal Participation of all players becomes > False. When a player's Proposal Participation becomes true, the > Promotor CAN once by announcement, and SHALL before it becomes false, > grant 3 Idea Gems to that player. > With the Democracy gem, I think that this is pretty cool, to encourage other players to interact meaningfully with core Agoran Gameplay. With the "only 1 proposal in the pool per author" at a time amendment (suggested above), I think this will mean some players will convince others (or maybe enable via contract) to propose on eir behalf. * Clean Gem (Referee); As part of eir weekly duties, the Referee SHALL, > and CAN by announcement, grant 2 Clean Gems to each player who does not > have Blots. > I don't know that we need free gems for being "clean". The activity gem already handles regular participation awards. I think maybe it would be better for the opposite: to get free gems for being "dirty", like a medium amount of blots (maybe 3 blots or more) causes you get get dirty gems instead? because people can just get dirty by creating blots on themselves. If we want "clean" vs "dirty" maybe that'd be worthwhile? like grant some activity gems for "clean" players, because those are basic participation? but i don't think "clean" is necessary. > * Activity Gem (Registrar): As part of eir weekly duties, the Registrar > SHALL, and CAN by announcement, grant 2 Activity Gems to each active > player. [Perhaps Welcome Packages should contain lots of these, and > smaller amounts of the other types of gem.] > I like the idea presented: give new players something to play with that they can get back. However, I can see this being scammed by some players deregistering, putting their gems into a contract or so, waiting a month, and re-registering to get another welcome package, depending on how much of a difference it is... * Change Gem (Rulekeepor): Whenever a proposal (other than a > disinterested proposal) takes effect and enacts, repeals, or changes a > substantive aspect of at least one rule, the Rulekeepor CAN once by > announcement, and SHALL in a timely fashion, grant 4 Change Gems to its > author. ["Disinterested" originally undefined but we can add it back > into the rules if people start voting down bugfixes despite the > Democracy Gem.] > If "The Crystal" is enacted, I don't like this due to duplication, but otherwise, I once again appreciate the blatant encouragement of rule churn. > * Achievement Gem (Tailor): Whenever one of a player's Ribbon Ownership > switches flips from False to True, the Tailor CAN once by announcement, > and SHALL within one month, award that player 9 Achievement Gems. > I really like this also: it encourages older players to finish up their renaissance with a thesis, and start getting ribbons again, and it also encourages mentorship so the older players can have some of the newer players' gems. So after they register and get activity gems, I do want to note that this seems like a substantial office, and it also spreads more burden upon each officer. The Gem Market > > The following Purchase Packs exist: > > * A Power Pack. A player's voting strength on an ordinary proposal is > increased by 2 if e bought a Power Pack during the preceding month. > [This could do with being tracked somehow – unclear what the best way > to track this is. The Assessor currently has to mention it when > resolving proposals; is that enough?] > Also should be a limit to how much power can be granted this way? > * A Small Victory Pack. When a player buys a Small Victory Pack, e is > granted 1 Score Star. > > * A Large Victory Pack. When a player buys a Large Victory Pack, e is > granted 2 Score Stars. > I don't know that score stars are necessary for this large proposal: the win can be by the other existing methods of winning, eg stamps, stones, or proposal. Pack Price is an Purchase Pack switch, tracked by the Jeweller, whose > possible values are "unavailable" (the default) and all lists of (Gem > type, positive integer) pairs. In a timely fashion after the start of > each month, the Jeweller SHALL, and CAN by announcement, flip the Pack > Price of each Purchase Pack to [(A, 12), (B, 10), (C, 8), (D, 6)] > (where, for each Purchase Pack, A, B, C, D are types of Gem, chosen > randomly subject to the restriction that the same type of Gem is not > chosen twice for any given Purchase Pack; the same type of Gem can > however be chosen for two different Purchase Packs). Upon doing so, for > each type of Gem, 1 Gem of that type is revoked from each entity who > owns at least one Gem of that type. > This revocation of gem types is exploitable by a contract that contains proxies of the gems, but is otherwise like a shared locker? Each player CAN buy a Purchase Pack that is not unavailable by > spending, for each (Gem type, integer) pair in its Pack Price, that > many gems of that type, subject to the restriction that no player CAN > buy any given Purchase Pack if e has already bought that Purchase Pack > that month. (For example, if a Purchase Pack's Pack Price is [(Idea, > 1), (Clean, 2)], a player CAN buy that Purchase Pack by spending 1 Idea > Gem and 2 Clean Gems, unless e has already done so that month.) > This doesn't work with the existing wording for forgiveness pack > > Score Stars > > Score Stars are type of a fixed asset, tracked by the Jeweller. > Ownership of Score Stars is restricted to players. > > If a player has more Score Stars than any other player, and the > Boulder's Height is 50 or more, that player CAN Score eir Stars by > announcement. This causes that person to win the game. When a player > wins the game by doing so, all Score Stars are destroyed and the > Boulder's Height is set to 0. > I like interacting with the boulder, but I don't know that this is the way. I think maybe the absurdor can grant Sisyphian gems based on whether the boulder is 50 or more? but maybe still reset the boulder on some condition (if someone wins it resets is still a fine condition for that). Overall, as I've said before, not a big fan of a new asset or new economy, but I tend towards FOR anyways (that and I am in your debt a tiny bit!) -- 4ˢᵗ Uncertified Bad Idea Generator
