Because crystals were always meant to incentivize repeals. Reenactments I
thought would just be funny.
And there will always be incentives one way or another... but I'm thinking
that nomic has this axis of integration versus separation that was always
meant to be bridged? Perhaps what's missing is the cost to submit proposals
again... I guess this proto is not super integrated just yet
--
4st
putting jesters cap back on, it fell off while mobile
On Tue, Sep 17, 2024, 7:32 PM Janet Cobb via agora-discussion <
agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> On 9/17/24 20:46, 4st nomic via agora-discussion wrote:
> > {
> > Title: Crystal Improvements?
> > Adoption Index: 1.0
> > Author: 4st
> > Co-authors: Mischief, Janet
> >
> > [This is intended to simplify crystals for me, reduce the disincentives,
> > and increase the speed of crystallization, whilst still encouraging
> > amendment and repeals over creation. I do not think crystals should be
> > repealed: nomic is an experiment about the rules themselves, trying to
> keep
> > them separate feels at ends to nomic, and more of a tourney or contract
> > type thing.]
> >
> > (Take note of all the crystals (specifically their size) that currently
> > exist.)
> > Amend Rule 2685 ("Crystals") to read:
> > {
> > The Geologist is a sortitioned office that tracks crystals.
> > A crystal is a fungible asset.
> >
> > When a proposal enacts a rule, grant the author and each co-author 1
> > crystal.
> > When a proposal amends a rule, grant the author of that proposal crystals
> > equal to the power of that rule, and grant each co-author one crystal.
> > When a proposal repeals or reenacts a rule, grant the author of that
> > proposal 5 crystals, and each co-author 1 crystal.
> >
> > A player is crystallized if the total crystals e owns is
> > at least the number of rules in the current ruleset.
> >
> > Any player CAN, by announcement, Shatter the System, specifying at
> > least 1 crystallized player, and provided that no person has done
> > so in the past 30 days. When a player does so, each crystallized
> > player wins the game.
> >
> > If a player won the game in this manner 4 days ago, then all
> > existing crystals are destroyed.
> > }
> >
> > All previous crystals are destroyed, and each crystal owner gains
> crystals
> > equal to the total size of crystals they owned previously.
> > }
> >
>
> A few things:
>
> Rules should not be written in the imperative: "the author is granted",
> not "grant the author".
>
> Why are you proposing to reward repeals and reenactments at five times
> the rate of enactments and amendments? They involve less actual work,
> and doing this for repeals in particular seems to encourage
> less-than-ideal behavior ("let's repeal a bunch of stuff for the
> crystals").
>
> This doesn't seem to actually address the issue of perverse incentives?
> It creates *different* incentives (by creating but not transferring) but
> doesn't change the fact that people are incentivized to vote against
> proposals they didn't author in order to prevent them from gaining
> economic benefits.
>
> --
> Janet Cobb
>
> Assessor, Rulekeepor
>
>
