I do agree with that Officers should be rewarded somehow, but my main issue here is how the democracy is run, not Officer rewards.
Maybe we could keep those rewards somehow without any nerfs while limiting or nerfing other things? I've attempted a "Officer salary" proto, anyways. I'm also sorry if I got too negative On Friday, May 19, 2023, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion < agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > On Fri, May 19, 2023 at 11:47 AM Yachay Wayllukuq via agora-discussion > <agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > > So, only someone who already is in power and a beneficiary of the system > > should be entitled to propose change things? > > Er, I never said you couldn't propose. I was giving you feedback on > how I felt about voting for it. > > It's a generally interesting point you raise, in that we've (over the > years) frequently discussed about not being too entrenched, and giving > new players the ability to jump right in without huge handicaps. That > said, we are a small community, that takes some service to maintain > via officers, and it makes sense to give longer-serving players at > least something of a boost - it's not fair to their genuine effort > over months to achieve a certain position (become "already in power"), > to say a brand-new player jumps in with equal footing. Also, in > particular, rule changes often impact officers' jobs, so it seems > quite reasonable to give them a bit more say in changes that could > include their office duties. > > And the thing with my "accusation" is - you've already done it once, > to be fair. We'd been playing with proposal-based radiance awards for > about a year, which were seen as fairly minor rewards for encouraging > the writing of good proposals. But within a short time of joining the > game, your own voting patterns - making something uncomfortably > "political" that was never intended or played that way - became > onerous enough that you basically crashed the system (brought us to > the point of repealing it, rather than deal with your voting > patterns). In doing so, the collateral damage included removing > radiance awards for Judges, so Judges no longer get a little bonus for > judging. I honestly thought that was a bit thoughtless. This is > exactly what I want to avoid again, so I'm quite skeptical about > arguments to repeal something that gives bonuses or reward-for-labor > (especially longstanding 'service' offices where people aren't just > running their own subgame for less than a week :) ) when there's no > concrete proposal of anything to compensate. > > But enough negativity there (sorry) - I don't mean for this to express > any actual metagame annoyance, just thoughts about power tradeoffs and > design, and I very much look forward to seeing if nix's ideas might > work. > > -G. >
