Oh, I do read everything, don't worry. I've only skimmed your plan as yet, but 
even with a cursory glance I see you've put a lot more thought into it than me!

I would rather keep everything in the proposal pool so I can refer to things by 
ID number, instead of having to keep checking back to older messages, so I'm 
not retracting it right now, but sure, I won't pend "From each according to eir 
means" (or anything like it) until you're ready.

I submit all proposals from my post yesterday that I have not yet submitted, 
except "A new industry: sand and glass" (which, as Trigon pointed out, is 
totally ineffectual in its current form). It's a bit silly, but the reason I 
didn't do this at first was to help obscure my attempts to declare apathy; 
since those have been objected to now there's no point in keeping them away 
from the Promotor. :)

I submit the following proposal. Text within [square brackets] is not part of 
the proposal.

-twg

---
Title: Frankenstein's land auctions
Adoption index: 1.0
Author: twg

[ Here's another option: specific land auction rules that are a hybrid of one
  and five auctions. Pick your favourite? ]

Amend rule 2004, "Land Auctions", by replacing the last sentence with the
following:

           For this auction, the announcer is the Cartographor, the
      auctioneer is Agora, the minimum bid is 1 coin, and the authorized
      bidders are all active players.
      
[ The above bans zombies from bidding. ]

Amend rule 2004, "Land Auctions", by appending the following as a new
paragraph:
      
      When a land auction ends, all bids by the winner of that auction on
      other land auctions are withdrawn.

[ The phrasing here is based on the assumption that auctions started in the
  same message end one at a time rather than simultaneously, which I think I
  remember reading a CFJ about. The idea is that people can choose which units
  of land they are interested in (which is the principal advantage of the five-
  auction method) but can't dominate the market and win all the auctions. ]
---
​​

‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐

On July 14, 2018 6:45 AM, Aris Merchant <thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> 
wrote:

> ​​
> 
> twg, in case you don't read all threads, please see my thread "Long
> 
> Term Economic Reform Plan". In particular, I request that you delay
> 
> "From each according to eir means" till next week. You may also want
> 
> to read the rest of the thread.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Aris
> 
> On Fri, Jul 13, 2018 at 3:00 PM Reuben Staley
> 
> reuben.sta...@gmail.com wrote:
> 
> > Comments inline. If there are no comments on a proposal that means I would
> > 
> > support it the way it is.
> > 
> > On Fri, Jul 13, 2018, 14:51 Timon Walshe-Grey m...@timon.red wrote:
> > 
> > > [snippity snip]
> > 
> > > Title: From each according to eir means
> > > 
> > > Adoption index: 2.0
> > > 
> > > Author: twg
> > > 
> > > Co-authors:
> > > 
> > > [ This is an attempt at a reset/rebalance that strikes a middle ground
> > > 
> > > between
> > > 
> > > completely erasing everyone's progress and leaving the current
> > > 
> > > exponentially-
> > > 
> > > growing inequality in place. I'm not positive that I struck the right
> > > 
> > > balance
> > > 
> > > but even if it's rejected it can be a starting point for discussion. ]
> > > 
> > > For each facility owned by a player, transfer all coins owned by that
> > > 
> > > facility
> > > 
> > > to its owner.
> > > 
> > > For each zombie owned by a player, transfer all coins owned by that zombie
> > > 
> > > to
> > > 
> > > its owner.
> > > 
> > > Decrease the coin balance of each player to the square root (rounded up to
> > > 
> > > the
> > > 
> > > next largest integer) of however many coins e possessed before this
> > > 
> > > sentence
> > > 
> > > took effect.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 
> > While this does technically bring everyone closer to the same amount of
> > 
> > money, I'm not sure this is the best way to do it. This also doesn't fix
> > 
> > the gap in land ownership. I really think we need to do a map reset to
> > 
> > achieve maximum equality.
> > 
> > [snip snap]
> > 
> > > Title: Crackdown on minting (reindustrialisation edition)
> > > 
> > > Adoption index: 2.0
> > > 
> > > Author: twg
> > > 
> > > Co-authors:
> > > 
> > > [ As I've said before, I think coin production needs to go altogether, but
> > > 
> > > destroying the refineries outright seems unnecessarily unfair, so my
> > > 
> > > preference is for this edition - though I haven't come up with anything
> > > 
> > > to
> > > 
> > > use steel for yet. Also, G., I apologise for my appalling timing in
> > > 
> > > proposing
> > > 
> > > to render your contract ineffective! ]
> > > 
> > > Amend rule 2483, "Economics", by:
> > > 
> > > -   adding "steel" to the list of currencies (appropriately numbered)
> > > -   adding "steel" to the list of refined currencies
> > > -   adding "coins" to the list of unrefinable currencies
> > > -   removing "coins" from the list of refined currencies
> > > 
> > > Amend rule 2564, "Processing Facilities", by changing "coins" to "steel"
> > > 
> > > in the
> > > 
> > > Processing Details of Refineries.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 
> > I like this, and if I had it my way, steel would even become an important
> > 
> > building resource, like cloth is now.
> > 
> > [spin]
> > 
> > > Title: Back to one auction
> > > 
> > > Adoption index: 1.0
> > > 
> > > Author: twg
> > > 
> > > Amend rule 2004, "Land Auctions", by replacing the first sentence of the
> > > 
> > > last
> > > 
> > > paragraph with the following:
> > > 
> > >       If at least one land unit is selected by the process described 
> > > above,
> > >       the Cartographor CAN and SHALL initiate an auction with each 
> > > selected
> > >       land unit as a lot. The authorized bidders for this auction are all
> > >       active players.
> > >     
> > > 
> > > [ Note that, unlike the original version, zombies are banned from bidding.
> > > 
> > > ]
> > > 
> > > 
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 
> > I don't recall who, but someone said that each different auction system had
> > 
> > its own benefits, which I agree with. I really think alternating between 5
> > 
> > auctions and one is the best way to run these auctions. So let it be known
> > 
> > that I while would support this, I think there's a better way to do it.
> > 
> > > Title: This planet is too chilly
> > > 
> > > Adoption index: 2.0
> > > 
> > > Author: twg
> > > 
> > > Co-authors: Trigon
> > > 
> > > [ Coal is not my idea; I lifted it from Trigon's proto-proposal. It
> > > 
> > > restricts
> > > 
> > > processing facilities a little, which is perhaps a good thing, but it
> > > 
> > > also
> > > 
> > > increases the number of land units you need to maintain self-sufficiency,
> > > 
> > > which is a bit of a barrier for new players. I figured I might as well
> > > 
> > > put
> > > 
> > > it in the pile. ]
> > > 
> > > Amend rule 2483, "Economics", by adding:
> > > 
> > > -   "coal" to the list of currencies (appropriately numbered); and
> > > -   "coal" to the list of unrefinable currencies.
> > > 
> > > Amend rule 2561, "Asset Generation with Facilities", by changing the third
> > > 
> > > paragraph to read in full:
> > > 
> > >       At the end of every Agoran Week, for each Processing facility, as
> > >       many times as possible, Agora destroys a number of assets in the
> > >       possession of that facility and replaces them with a corresponding
> > >       number of different assets, as specified by the rule that creates
> > >       the facility.
> > >     
> > > 
> > > Amend rule 2564, "Processing Facilities", by changing every occurrence of
> > > 
> > > the
> > > 
> > > word "to" to "and 1 coal to".
> > > 
> > > Amend rule 2563, "Production Facilities", by adding the following new list
> > > 
> > > item, appropriately numbered:
> > > 
> > >       Coal Mines
> > >          -  Build Cost: 5 lumber
> > >          -  Upkeep Cost: 2n-2 lumber
> > >          -  Production Details: 3n stones and 2n coal
> > >          -  Upgrade Costs:
> > >             -  Rank 2: 3 coins, 2 lumber
> > >             -  Rank 3: 4 coins, 4 lumber
> > >             -  Rank 4: 5 coins, 4 lumber, 3 stones
> > >             -  Rank 5: 6 coins, 6 lumber, 6 stones, 2 fabric
> > >     
> > > 
> > > [ This is functionally equivalent to adding in Trigon's specialisation
> > > 
> > > options,
> > > 
> > > but I felt it would have made the proposal a little too long and hard to
> > > 
> > > make
> > > 
> > > a decision on. I intend, without objection, to declare apathy, specifying
> > > 
> > > myself to win the game. If this passes, we can always simplify it later;
> > > 
> > > the
> > > 
> > > specicialisation options do sound fun in principle. ]
> > > 
> > > 
> > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 
> > You're right. I have a tendency to write things too long. I also really
> > 
> > like this idea, and am glad someone submitted it.
> > 
> > > Title: Something to use paper for
> > > 
> > > Adoption index: 2.1
> > > 
> > > Author: twg
> > > 
> > > [ With free proposals, paper is entirely useless - not that anyone was
> > > 
> > > producing it anyway - so this is an idea to make mills a little more
> > > 
> > > attractive. ]
> > > 
> > > Enact a new rule of power 2.1, "Libraries", with the following text:
> > > 
> > >       The following facilities are defined as Miscellaneous facilities:
> > >     
> > >       Libraries
> > >          -  Build Cost: 1 lumber and 1 paper
> > >     
> > 
> >          -  Upkeep Cost: n paper
> >     
> > 
> > >          -  Upgrade Costs:
> > >             -  Rank 2: 1 lumber and 2 paper
> > >             -  Rank 3: 2 lumber and 3 paper
> > >     
> > >       A player CAN, by announcement, Request Texts from a library e owns
> > >       regarding the reduction of a specified currency in the upkeep costs
> > >     
> > > 
> > > of a
> > > 
> > > specified non-library facility. This has the following effects, which
> > > 
> > > last until the end of the message in which the Texts were Requested:
> > > 
> > >          - The facility's upkeep cost is reduced by n of the currency,
> > >     
> > > 
> > > where n
> > > 
> > > is the rank of the library. (If this would cause the facility's
> > > 
> > > upkeep cost to include a negative quantity of any currency, it
> > > 
> > > instead includes zero of that currency.)
> > > 
> > > - Further attempts to Request Texts specifying the same currency
> > > 
> > > and
> > > 
> > > facility are INEFFECTIVE.
> > > 
> > > [ The above phrasing is a little cumbersome but it was the best way I 
> > > could
> > > 
> > > think of to have the intended effect (each facility can have exactly one
> > > 
> > > library help pay for each currency) without producing more things for
> > > 
> > > officers to keep track of. ]
> > > 
> > >       Libraries CANNOT own assets.
> > >     
> > 
> > Too cheap, and also I don't really like having all of this information
> > 
> > under the assets rule. I suggest moving all the library special details to
> > 
> > another rule.
> > 
> > > Title: A new industry: sand and glass
> > > 
> > > Adoption index: 2.0
> > > 
> > > Author: twg
> > > 
> > > Co-authors:
> > > 
> > > [ This isn't intended to fix any perceived problem; I just thought that an
> > > 
> > > extra type of facility might make it a little more interesting so that
> > > 
> > > we're
> > > 
> > > not just playing the exact same subgame again with slightly different
> > > 
> > > rules.
> > > 
> > > I intend, without objection, to declare apathy, specifying myself to win
> > > 
> > > the
> > > 
> > > game. On the other hand, it might just make things unnecessarily
> > > 
> > > complicated;
> > > 
> > > and this proposal doesn't actually contain anything to use glass for,
> > > 
> > > though
> > > 
> > > ideas are welcome, and I also have a few of my own if people are
> > > 
> > > interested
> > > 
> > > in principle. ]
> > > 
> > > Amend rule 2483, "Economics", by adding:
> > > 
> > > -   "sand" and "glass" to the list of currencies (appropriately numbered);
> > >     
> > >     and
> > >     
> > > -   "sand" to the list of refinable currencies; and
> > > -   "glass" to the list of refined currencies.
> > > 
> > > Amend rule 2564, "Processing Facilities", by adding the following new list
> > > 
> > > item, appropriately numbered:
> > > 
> > >         Glassworks
> > >            - Build Cost: 8 lumber and 4 stones
> > >            - Upkeep Cost: 3 coins
> > >            - Processing Details: 1 sand to 5 glass
> > >     
> > > 
> > > [ The build cost may be a little unbalanced if refineries are not also
> > > 
> > > removed, but that seems like the sort of thing that's relatively simple
> > > 
> > > to
> > > 
> > > tweak after the fact. ]
> > > 
> > > 
> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 
> > Yeah but how do you get sand? And glass should be given a purpose, even if
> > 
> > it is just as a building material.
> > 
> > I object to all intents to declare apathy in the quoted message.
> > 
> > >


Reply via email to