On Fri, 3 Nov 2017, Nic Evans wrote: > On 11/03/17 12:11, Kerim Aydin wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, 3 Nov 2017, Nic Evans wrote: > >> Enact a new Power 1 rule titled "Estate Types and Assets" with the > >> following text: > > So, I'm not very keen on this part. I think that these add very little > > to Land and don't reform it to anything reasonable based on giving > > folks things to buy. I'd prefer that Land Reform is done separately > > as a way to really change supply/demand and spending, not just adding > > trinkets to buy or simple pend/CFJ tokens - this needs more thought. > > > > Fair enough, I'm not as happy with it as I thought I'd be either. But > what do you think of the assets in general? Would they be acceptable in > a different format, such as being randomly created & auctioned like stamps?
-I think tying some form of the asset-generation to the land is where I want to go, so that's on-target. -As I said before, I think our long-history of single-use voting tokens makes them not worth making. I'd prefer to allow land to be set to a Type that gives a permanent voting boost, but isn't otherwise productive. -While making single assets for the other basic things (proposals, CFJs) is fine, we've done that before, and if someone can have land units in both types, that limits trading. I'd actually be interested in trying the "combo- collection" model (e.g. to Pend a Proposal you need 1 Paper and 1 Ink, and it's more expensive to farm both at once than it is to be an Ink farmer and then trading to get paper). I said before I didn't have time to work on it, but the rest of your system is clear and I like it - drastically decreases the reforms needed to get land working so maybe I'll have a crack if you don't mind?
