On 3/16/24 22:17, nix via agora-discussion wrote:
> Here's a proto, let me know what you think:
>
> {
> Title: Spendies
> Author: nix
> Co-Authors:
> AI: 2Idea seems fine? I'm pretty bad at judging economies though. The obligatory copy-editing follows: > [Spendies are simple. We all start with the same amount every month, > and if you don't use them you lose them. You can transfer them, put > them in contracts, etc. But they will go away. What's important is what > you do with them in that month.] > > Enact a new P=1 rule titled Spendies with the text: > > Spendies are a fungible liquid asset ownable by players and > contracts. Spendies are tracked by the Spendor in eir weekly > report. "P=1" grr... "Spendies are a currency". Also, per precedent, this has to say "with ownership wholly restricted to players and contracts" (or similar), otherwise it doesn't override the default of being ownable by Agora. > Retitle R2642 (Gathering Stones) to "Stone Cost" and amend R2642 to read > in full: > > Stone Cost is a Stone switch with values of non-negative integers > and a default of 50. Stone Cost is tracked by the Stonemason. > > When a stone is transferred, its Stone Cost is set to the default. > At the beginning of every week, the Stone Cost for each stone is > reduced by 10, unless it is already 0. "reduced by 10 to a minimum of 0", to handle the case where it is no longer a multiple of 10? This should maybe say "Retitle ..., then amend" just to be very clear about the order and not risk triggering the R105. I *think* it's clear enough, but as usual I'm paranoid. -- Janet Cobb Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
