Friday, July 13, 2007

Proposal: Robbing Graves

1-9. Cannot be enacted without CoV.
—Chronos

Adminned at 15 Jul 2007 07:20:45 UTC

Proposal to append the following to the end of 2.8, “Sale of Rights”:

If at any time a Corporation which owns Naming Rights to one or more non-Public Knowledge Daemon(s) becomes an Idle Corporation, it forfeits its claim to Naming Rights for those Daemons. If as a result of this rule no Corporations hold Naming Rights to a Daemon, that Daemon’s Naming Rights become Public Knowledge.

If a Corporation loses its Naming Rights to a Daemon as a result of this rule, it may purchase those Naming Rights back at a cost equal to $(S*X)M, where S is the square of the summoning cost of the Daemon, and X is the number of corporations who employ the Daemon.  A Corporation cannot buy Naming Rights back if it allows more than 7 days to pass after being de-idled.

If a Corporation loses its Naming Rights to a Daemon and the Naming Rights subsequently become Public Knowledge as a result of this rule, the cost to purchase those Naming Rights is $(S*Y)M, where S is the square of the summoning cost of the Daemon, and Y is the number of Major Corporations at the time of attempting buyback.  This cost is to be paid to the corporations who employ the Daemon, each corporation receiving an equal part of the total cost, who must release the Daemon from their employ at no cost to them.  A Corporation attempting to buyback Naming Rights to a Daemon who’s Naming Rights are Public Knowledge will not be allowed to do so if more than 14 days are allowed to pass after that Corporation is de-idled.

Upon enactment this proposal effects all naming rights/daemons/corporations retroactively.

For an example of the first case, if a Daemon’s summoning cost is 5, and 2 corporations employ the Daemon, the buyback cost of Naming Rights for the Daemon would be (5 squared = 25) times 2, or $50M.  As an example of the second case, if a Daemon’s summoning cost is 3, and their are 12 Major Corporations, out of which 4 employ the Daemon, the buyback cost would be (3 squared = 9) times 12 = $108M, divided 4 ways = $27M to each corporation.

Comments

Hix:

13-07-2007 18:39:21 UTC

against Do we need this?  Is there a particular benefit to going against the spirit of “the Corporation’s personal gamestate retains the values it had immediately prior to their going Idle”?

Kevan: he/him

13-07-2007 18:48:14 UTC

against This seems like a disincentive to go idle. Formally Idle players are better than queue-cloggingly absent ones.

Chivalrybean:

13-07-2007 19:20:59 UTC

against

Currently going idle does no real harm to your corporation other than it just sits there. This rule would make it less attractive to idle, and some people go idle due to need, not want.

Bucky:

13-07-2007 21:52:01 UTC

against
In addition to the above-mentioned points, your disregard of units means that the rule may not work properly if some Daemon has an unusual summoning cost (such as 3 Souls and an Office)

Zephyr:

13-07-2007 23:41:58 UTC

against

Icarus:

14-07-2007 07:48:43 UTC

against Sounds rather harsh.

Brendan: he/him

14-07-2007 09:10:14 UTC

against

Clucky: he/him

14-07-2007 17:02:21 UTC

imperial

The problem is, what happens when there is no active coporation currently employing a deamon? This isn’t as harsh as just putting that daemon in public domain and forgetting about it.

Night:

14-07-2007 20:23:00 UTC

My original intent behind this proposal was the fact that, in the current ruleset, there is no specific instruction on what to do with naming rights to a daemon if and when no active corporations remain with naming rights to it.  Common sense may say “well, let’s just make it public knowledge”, but the point is the rules don’t specifically state we can do that.

The main reason I felt this error should be corrected is because Kasadya’s naming rights are owned by Brendan, alethiophile, and BobTHJ, of whom only Brendan is active.

The reason for buyback clauses was to just give a little compensation for anyone who started employing a newly-public domain daemon only to find it ripped away when the previous naming rights owner was de-idled.

I guess another draft without the disincentives is in order?

Hix:

14-07-2007 21:11:23 UTC

As it currently is, should all Corporations with naming rights to a Daemon happen to go idle, then it will simply be the case that no Corporation has the naming rights.  And there’s nothing wrong with that, really.

ChronosPhaenon:

14-07-2007 21:26:04 UTC

against