Monday, May 09, 2011

Proposal: The Great Equalizer, Again

Timed out 5-3.—Yoda

Adminned at 11 May 2011 13:19:34 UTC

In the rule “Startups”, replace the text

This new Corporation shall start with a Worth of 0 and a Business Plan of “Add (2-DICE6) * 50”


This new Corporation shall start with a Worth of 500 and a Business Plan of “Add ((1DICE4) - 2) * 50”

Set the Worth of Rules and Co to 500 and the Business Plan of Rules and Co to “Add ((1DICE4) - 2) * 50”.

This I think is a more fair version of my previous proposal, and has the added benefit of getting RUL out of the hole (essentially resetting their stats to that of a new Startup).



05-09-2011 19:32:58 UTC



05-09-2011 20:04:31 UTC



05-09-2011 21:32:01 UTC



05-09-2011 22:05:43 UTC

against Massively increasing the worth of a company via proposal seems like a bad idea, as that sort of tampering will make it almost impossible to get a working economic system going.


05-09-2011 22:08:50 UTC

Because Ely has idled, the current vote count is 2-2.

@ais: I’m just resetting their stats to that of a new Startup, since they have done nothing but lose money since they started.  And since my proposal is seeking to change the starting stats, I’m giving RUL another chance to pick back up.


05-10-2011 03:36:50 UTC



05-10-2011 07:26:02 UTC

Abstaining for now. Decide amongst yourselves whether this is fair.


05-10-2011 15:16:03 UTC



05-10-2011 17:18:36 UTC



05-10-2011 23:35:26 UTC

Hmm… apart from the RUL reset, I rather like this, but it’s still not going to help the chronic issues with the dynasty (which are that all currently available investments are incredibly bad ideas, both existing corporations and startups). Even with perfect dice rolls, it would take 10 days for a startup to even break even; in practice, they aren’t going to get dice rolls. Likewise, the Market’s prices for existing corporations are completely unrealistic; given that Worth converts directly into cash, the book value for one share Goldberg Technology, currently the best-performing company, is around $17 (and thus the market value should be equal to that, plus however much you think will be gained from the company’s performances in future, an expectation of $0.75 per 2 days, or around $2.6 per week extra, so the price of GBT implies a predicted length of around 50 days for the dynasty, and it’s unlikely to last that long without anyone investing). So what will typically happen is that for a while, people who do nothing will be better off, but eventually the players who have done something (which is typically the players who pay more attention) will just arbitrarily change the rules via proposal to give themselves an advantage.


05-11-2011 07:24:11 UTC

I balanced my prices to the cost of startups, so that if they’re terrible investments (which I agree they are at the moment), at least they’re EQUALLY terrible. I was worried that all my shares might be snatched up quickly if I priced them at the values you’re suggesting so that Investors who didn’t get there in time (or joined later) would be left with no realistic way of catching up.

I think the best way to fix this is to add a way for corporations to increase their worth far beyond what the quarterly reports give them now, and/or do a radical rewrite of the startups rule (maybe just make the Worth of the new corporation the sum of the money poured into it minus a set amount or something). I’d prefer to at least do the first solution; we need much quicker ways for corporations to make/lose money. Any takers? I’m out of proposal slots at the moment, and I’m too busy to write something besides.


05-11-2011 17:19:11 UTC

Sigh. . . With finals over and 2 weeks to myself before I take summer classes, I can take a really good look at this. I think that right now one of the biggest problems is what ais523 said: Purplebeard is charging far too much for shares in the existing companies. Therefore nobody is willing to buy shares of any existing companies. Then RUL got a bad startup deal, so nobody(well, almost) is willing to take shares in a company with negative worth. On top of it all is the restricted ability for Investors to make money to buy shares with in the first place, spare selling shares and making proposals. I don’t really know what sort of mechanic would be best to generate money, but maybe one of you guys can think something up. If we have litigations being created, then it’s very obvious that at least a few of you really know your way around the subject.
But to address the subject at hand, I think this is the best way to correct how RUL got a bad deal and help any new company from getting a bad deal.
Off-topic, but why won’t my “p” button work when I’m typing normally?! Sigh. I think my computer is beginning to show its age. Infrequently used keys getting a little stuck. . . . . Sigh.