On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 9:26 PM nichdel <nich...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 11/04/2016 08:05 PM, ais523 wrote: > > The largest problem is that you haven't specified an officer to track > > the switches. > Woops, lost it in editing. Meant to be the Secretary. > > Currencies typically need to have multiple dimensions so that a varying > > exchange rate can be set up between them. > > > > Out of interest, is anyone else working on an economy proposal at the > > moment? It might be worth sharing notes. (I've been having some > > thoughts in that direction, but nothing concrete.) > > There's the more complex one I spent a while on [1] before dropping. My > concern is that we're barely filling the offices now, I don't want to > overwhelm officers with too many monthly tabulations. Thus the attempt > at one currency with variable prices. > > [1] http://hearthgate.net/agorawiki/Econ-Proto
I like the idea of a simple economy. I have an idea for a complex one and some of my recent proposals have been spinoffs from that idea. That said, and ais523 will agree, proposal distribution is a rather weak reward for economy for two reasons. The first is that proposal distribution is the fundamental mechanic of the game, and slowing it down can lead to bad incentives, like minor fix proposals not being worth it. The second is that proposal distribution is the fundamental mechanic of the game, and so players are in practice willing to help each other out with it. In every variation of the limited-distribution mechanic I've seen, people invariably assist each other 99% of the time, which makes the economy rather pointless. Voting strength is the obvious easy target for economy, winning is the higher bar. Based on my past experience, voting strength increases should not be for a specific proposal (encourages hoarding for voting fights over proposals rather than general changes of influence over time), and should reset naturally in some fashion. For now, simple is probably fine. -Alexis
