Re: [s-d] The Responsibility in Government Spending Act

["Craig Daniel" <teucer@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 5:59 PM, Jamie Dallaire
<bad.leprechaun@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 5:34 PM, Warrigal
> <ihope127+w@xxxxxxxxx<ihope127%2Bw@xxxxxxxxx>
>> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 4:18 PM, Geoffrey Spear <wooble@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> wrote:
>> > We don't need a second currency.  Making it more rare won't make it
>> > more valuable, since it can't be USED for anything.  Scarcity without
>> > utility is pointless.
>>
>> It's true that scarcity without utility is pointless (unless there are
>> enough collectors around, which seems to be the only thing giving
>> precious metals their value), but at least this proposal would create
>> a currency with a decent amount of scarcity. If I proposed something
>> that would create a way to spend our B money, would you vote AGAINST
>> because demanding something that isn't scarce is pointless?
>>
>> On that note, would anyone object to bringing back the RPG or
>> something like that?
>
>
> I'd be up for "something like that", but maybe not for the RPG in its old
> form. Not that I didn't like the RPG, it's just that we've already done
> that.
>
> Would it be a subgame or a regular part of the game like it was then?

I am not aware of the details of the RPG, but I know of another time
(in the first era) when there was a regular part of the game known as
the "Grid" that involved people running around collecting gnomes,
squeezing them to acquire useful fluids, and sometimes combining the
gnomes into various cocktail gnomes. There was also weather. And a
tide and phases of the moon.

While I'm also not saying we can bring *that* back as it was either,
I'm all for some strange subgame-like thing that isn't a subgame.

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