On Thu, 3 Jul 2008, Roger Hicks wrote: > What if you had the ability to optionally avoid the forced sale and > instead be subject to criminal penalty? Would this be reasonable to > you?
At this point, I'm realizing that I'm not comfortable being in a contract with this kind of economic character where (1) leaving the contract is limited in many circumstances and (2) the contract change mechanism is majority vote instead of without X objections. It's too easy to give substantial economic power to 51% of the group. You're making what should be "power-2 or above" level changes with a majority vote. That aside, I'd be comfortable with forced offering rates (must make X offers per N proposals at a fixed rate P when you're under water) but not ones where the buyer dictates absoliutely and automatically which proposal it happens for. I'd also suggest lowering the definition of "under water" to 40 for minimum (required to raise above within N days) but still 50 for being allowed to quit. This way you get a few "freebies" (a few things you can buy without having to switch into sell mode). Right now I think offers are so cheap because people are being forced to switch to sell mode too much (or trying to protect against it). -Goethe
