Re: [spoon-discuss] Re: [Spoon-business] Prop something something something

[Phil Ulrich <phil@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> You got rid of the Limit on Tildex Creation, which is a Problem because
> rampant Inflation will occur. Why would we want a devalued economy?

Why would we want an -un- devalued one? There doesn't seem to be a 
reason to have any limit on the number of tildex at the moment; if 
we're going to have a rule limited tildex, there should be a reason for 
unlimited tildex to be a Bad Thing. There doesn't seem to be anything 
to -do- with tildex, so there's no prices to inflate (why does research 
cost points instead of tildex, by the way).  Nor is there anything 
stating what to do in the event tildex are unavailable - does the 
tildex-giving just fail? Do we take tildex from the poor and give them 
to the rich, or vice versa?  Best to do away with it altogether until 
it's figured out exactly what to do with them and why inflation is Bad. 
(Other than in the Real World.)  If, on the other hand, we keep the 
tildex limitation, I want a public display to keep track of it - 
figuring the tildex limit every week could be an annoying task.

> You also removed my whimsical name. I thought it was clever.

I liked it too, but we seem to be doing away with all traces of whimsy 
in the ruleset.

> You don't like my pair of question marks?? Why do you prefer 'G' ??

The question marks would've worked, but the way that entire paragraph 
was phrased (particularly the G * 10000 bit) was bloody confusing.

> What's wrong with proposal 1885 for this? It has the advantage of not
> creating and destroying new rules all the time.

I don't agree with paying points for doing a ministry; I would support 
1885 and remove the last half of my own prop if p1885 used tildex.

--Phil

_______________________________________________
spoon-discuss mailing list
spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss