I find all the instances of "spend N Yaks, where N is the value of the Something Switch, a Budget Switch" and suchlike in the Rules to be ugly. The Tax Rule is the worst (best?) example of this. Of course, it's all my fault, because I mostly wrote the Rules in question, so I'd like to rectify the situation. To that end, I propose the following Rule. You might think it just moves the ugliness elsewhere, but it is a bit better, and it's always good to generalise.
Where the Rules state that an action CAN be performed "as a spending action in X", where X is a class of assets, then there exists a Budget Switch for that particular action, tracked by the recordkeepor of the specified class of assets, and that action CAN be performed for a cost equal to the value of the Budget Switch, paid in the specified class of assets. Players can earn assets as described in the Rules. Where the Rules do not specify the exact amount earned (e.g. "e earns some Yaks"), then there is a corresponding Budget Switch, tracked by the recordkeepor of the specified class of assets, and the player earns a number of assets equal to the value of the Budget Switch. For each event where a player earns an asset, there is an awarder who is the recordkeepor of the class of assets unless otherwise specified. A player who is an awarder for a class of assets CAN award that class of assets and destroy said assets by announcement, but SHALL NOT do so except as required by the Rules; this is the Class 7 Crime of Administrative Error. The previous sentence does not prohibit an awarder from destroying an asset owned by emself, if the asset can generally be destroyed by other entities which possess it. In a timely fashion after a player (the awardee) earns a number of assets, the relevant awarder SHALL award em the specified amount. When an awarder fails to award all of the assets within this time limit, e is still required by the Rules to make the award for the next thirty next after the end of the time limit. When an awarder awards too great an amount of assets to the awardee, e SHALL destroy as many of the awardee's assets as needed to rectify the mistake, in a timely fashion and before the awardee spends or transfers any of the assets. Where the Rules state that a type of entity (collectively termed the ratepayers) is to be taxed in a certain asset S with respect to time T, then there is a collector for that tax, who is the recordkeepor of the asset unless otherwise specified; two Budget Switches, the tax threshold and the tax rate, which are tracked by the collector; and optionally a recipient entity. If there is no recipient entity, the collector CAN destroy instances of the asset in the possession of the ratepayers, but SHALL NOT do so except as required by the Rules; this is the Class 7 Crime of Administrative Error. The previous sentence does not prohibit an Awarder from destroying an asset owned by emself, if the asset can generally be destroyed by other entities which possess it. If there is a recipient entity, the collector CAN transfer the asset from entities which own it to the recipient entity, but SHALL NOT do so except as required by the Rules. In order to satisfy a requirement to tax an asset S, the collector SHALL, in a timely fashion after time T, publish a report of: a) the amount of S owned by each ratepayer at time T, b) the amount of S owned by each ratepayer at time T above the relevant tax threshold (the taxable amount or TA), and c) the value of N [N = FLOOR(TA*TR/100)] for each ratepayer, where TR is the tax rate. Further, the collector SHALL, in a timely fashion after time T, destroy N of the asset in the possession of each player, or transfer the same amount to the recipient entity, as appropriate. If a ratepayer possesses fewer than N of the asset at the time of taxation, then ey commits the Class 5 Crime of Tax Evasion and the collector SHALL destroy all of that ratepayer's S. -- Walker
