"Currency" Inflation in the Gulch
Posted by freedomforall 10 years, 1 month ago to The Gulch: General
"Currency" Inflation in the Gulch
Consider for a moment the point system in this online Gulch.
What is it's purpose?
Does it's purpose support the ideals of objectivism, the free market, and value for value trade?
Be assured that my purpose of posting this is to encourage discussion so by all means feel free to disagree and to add your ideas, too. Everything here is open to discussion.
The existing point system appears to me to be a Gulch function similar to "likes" on another social networking site. That serves a social purpose as far as it goes, but it's not what I think of as particularly objectivist.
In my opinon, the Gulch point system should have a goal of encouraging discussion and encouraging rational thinking by digitally rewarding the members who make rational posts and comments, and other members of the Gulch should be able to do this of their own free will.
I think the existing point system does accomplish this to a certain degree.
BUT ...
I have been thinking for some time that the "point" system in this online Gulch has something in common with the current unstable western economic system: inflation.
The issuance of currency (points) has no cost, the supply is unlimited, and therefore the supply is growing. There is no value paid-in when we award points to others so the value of each of those points is diminishing. As the Gulch grows in population this effect will be even more pronounced.
I think the free market has shown one way to make this better.
(For purposes of discussion, I call the new points GaltsGold points.)
I think that every GaltsGold point that I award to another member should reduce the number of GaltsGold points that I have earned that appear in my Gulch account. I should give value for value. If a post is really valuable, I should be willing to acknowledge that via a digital payment of a point I have earned.
I think the Gulch experience could be improved with a more objectivist, value for value GaltsGold point system.
Here are some ideas for discussion:
- In a real Gulch those arriving would be able to bring some property they earned through production, and will have to earn any more to trade and survive.
- In any trading system there must be enough currency to enable and encourage free trade. Limiting the amount of currency stifles trade by giving the impression of scarcity.
- In the digital gulch I think new arrivals must be assumed as productive members unless they act otherwise.
- Therefore, in order to encourage valuable posts and encourage free trade, I think the Gulch should make a one time loan of GaltsGold points to every member. The loan can be revoked at any time by the Gulch, of course.
Suggestions on how GaltsGold points could be earned:
1) GaltsGold Points paid by other members to a topic or to a comment. (This is paid from the paying member's bank of GaltsGold points and reduces that balance.)
2) 1 point (from the Gulch's Mulligan Bank) paid to a member for a topic posted that earns at least 3 points paid by other members
3) Members are loaned 20 points for joining the Gulch
4) 1 point (from the Gulch's Mulligan Bank) paid to a member that has earned 5 GaltsGold points from other members in a month
5) Producers are awarded 1 point for each month they are paid producers
6) Any other value for value award that the owners of the Gulch site should choose.
Please consider that the above system might be gamed via collusion of members.
The current point system also allows down-votes. I don't think that will work fairly in a value for value point system. Points that have been earned (and paid for by another member) could be considered the property of the member. Taking away someone's earned property might be considered stealing.
Allowing uncontrolled down-voting could also make it possible for a terrorist troll to attack and destroy property in the Gulch. I think it is the duty of the very limited government in the Gulch (the site owners and designers) to protect property of the members. Recovering points correctly in such a case would be a complex problem programmatically.
The Gulch owners and marketplace vendors may consider offering discounted products as a reward to members who have earned specified GaltsGold point levels in the Gulch.
All of the above is just a suggestion.
I look forward to your rational comments, suggestions, improvements, and criticism.
Consider for a moment the point system in this online Gulch.
What is it's purpose?
Does it's purpose support the ideals of objectivism, the free market, and value for value trade?
Be assured that my purpose of posting this is to encourage discussion so by all means feel free to disagree and to add your ideas, too. Everything here is open to discussion.
The existing point system appears to me to be a Gulch function similar to "likes" on another social networking site. That serves a social purpose as far as it goes, but it's not what I think of as particularly objectivist.
In my opinon, the Gulch point system should have a goal of encouraging discussion and encouraging rational thinking by digitally rewarding the members who make rational posts and comments, and other members of the Gulch should be able to do this of their own free will.
I think the existing point system does accomplish this to a certain degree.
BUT ...
I have been thinking for some time that the "point" system in this online Gulch has something in common with the current unstable western economic system: inflation.
The issuance of currency (points) has no cost, the supply is unlimited, and therefore the supply is growing. There is no value paid-in when we award points to others so the value of each of those points is diminishing. As the Gulch grows in population this effect will be even more pronounced.
I think the free market has shown one way to make this better.
(For purposes of discussion, I call the new points GaltsGold points.)
I think that every GaltsGold point that I award to another member should reduce the number of GaltsGold points that I have earned that appear in my Gulch account. I should give value for value. If a post is really valuable, I should be willing to acknowledge that via a digital payment of a point I have earned.
I think the Gulch experience could be improved with a more objectivist, value for value GaltsGold point system.
Here are some ideas for discussion:
- In a real Gulch those arriving would be able to bring some property they earned through production, and will have to earn any more to trade and survive.
- In any trading system there must be enough currency to enable and encourage free trade. Limiting the amount of currency stifles trade by giving the impression of scarcity.
- In the digital gulch I think new arrivals must be assumed as productive members unless they act otherwise.
- Therefore, in order to encourage valuable posts and encourage free trade, I think the Gulch should make a one time loan of GaltsGold points to every member. The loan can be revoked at any time by the Gulch, of course.
Suggestions on how GaltsGold points could be earned:
1) GaltsGold Points paid by other members to a topic or to a comment. (This is paid from the paying member's bank of GaltsGold points and reduces that balance.)
2) 1 point (from the Gulch's Mulligan Bank) paid to a member for a topic posted that earns at least 3 points paid by other members
3) Members are loaned 20 points for joining the Gulch
4) 1 point (from the Gulch's Mulligan Bank) paid to a member that has earned 5 GaltsGold points from other members in a month
5) Producers are awarded 1 point for each month they are paid producers
6) Any other value for value award that the owners of the Gulch site should choose.
Please consider that the above system might be gamed via collusion of members.
The current point system also allows down-votes. I don't think that will work fairly in a value for value point system. Points that have been earned (and paid for by another member) could be considered the property of the member. Taking away someone's earned property might be considered stealing.
Allowing uncontrolled down-voting could also make it possible for a terrorist troll to attack and destroy property in the Gulch. I think it is the duty of the very limited government in the Gulch (the site owners and designers) to protect property of the members. Recovering points correctly in such a case would be a complex problem programmatically.
The Gulch owners and marketplace vendors may consider offering discounted products as a reward to members who have earned specified GaltsGold point levels in the Gulch.
All of the above is just a suggestion.
I look forward to your rational comments, suggestions, improvements, and criticism.
Previous comments... You are currently on page 3.
I don't understand how a value-point system would deter anyone from posting anything. There is no cost to posting at all, only to recommend another post as valuable. Could you explain, please?
What I propose is more like a free market using a currency of some value and of limited supply.
What I propose is more like a free market using a currency of some value and of limited supply.
> What is it's purpose?
As best I can tell, it identifies the most active users (where 'active' is something like 'articles posted + comments posted + upvotes')
> Does it's purpose support the ideals of objectivism, the free market, and value for value trade?
1 (ideals of objectivism): Not inherently, but it can be used that way (by upvoting insightful posts).
2 (the free market): Not really. Upvoting someone else's post costs me nothing and doesn't benefit me. It does increase the other person's point total, and others can use the upvote count to quickly identify insightful posts, but that only helps their position on the 'top point earners' display.
3 (value for value trade): Again, upvoting someone's post increases their reputation (both for the post and in the aggregate point counts) but costs me nothing. It benefits others (future readers) in that it helps them identify insightful posts (ot at least posts that *I* find insightful)
For instance, at the moment on the weekly point count board, khalling has 661 points, Non_mooching_artist 435, and freedomforall has 335. What does this mean? It might mean that KH posts twice as often as FFA, or that KH's posts are upvoted twice as much as FFA's posts, or something in between. In real terms, I think it means that they all are frequent posters and commenters on this site.
If what the enemies of liberty said was true then would there be no objectivist point trading at all? Would all objectiivists just horde their points for another personal use or would they see the value and self interest in rewarding others for valuable posts?
I know the answer, but I am an objectivist choir member. I like being able to add to the data that destroys the statists arguments. I also like that using the value point system the site could present a "greatest hits" list of posts for newcomers to the site.
Just an idea.
Applied it might actually create more value for your buck (point). Since you would actually be "buying" the value of that response or "buying" the value of a post that while you might not agree in part or at all... the discussion has merit and leads to a better understanding/appreciation of Objectivism/Gulch objectives.
I would advance a thought that I had begun to notice after being present for a while in the Gulch.
You make friends here -naturally. There are leaders in the group -naturally. And there is the tendency to support "friends" -naturally. These aspects are part of human nature -naturally. But, you begin to see a "favorite" status awarded among the "friends". Ex: One responds to a comment or post, "Great comment", "You said that right", "Good point", etc., the point is ( no pun intended) that if general comments such as these can earn the "friends" 5-6-7 points and the same short, general comment (on same post) from someone "outside" the "friends" group remains at -1- then is there something to be said here?
I am only trying to understand how can the system be "objective" if you will. I have tried to be correct and assign points to anyone that has "agreed" with a comment that I too am in agreement with or has introduced an interesting perspective to that post whether I agree or not.
There is no "perfect" application or resolution here. No one ever said that life is fair. It is not.
While I am very interested in the concept presented in this post, I remain somewhat skeptical that it might further deter or "limit" the liberty to freely state opinions and present ideas that should, in themselves, be their own reward.
However, that being said, I would certainly look forward to making some "Galt's Gold" and using it to pay for the unique, often great, posts and critiques found here in the Gulch.
My appreciation to all of you.
As for downvoting, under the unlimited system its ok but under a system where points have value its problematic, especially if a troll or trolls want to use it to disrupt the "economy."
The point inflation came about with the exponential growth of the user base. After a year or so, I was giving away hundreds of points a day because that's what I was receiving for my early contributions. Now, I can't imagine anyone planning a dive trip without going to DiveBuddy.com to learn more about the hundreds of underwater destinations around the world.
The point is, of course, that you can only pay what you earn. Frankly, I didn't even know I had any points here.
Regarding the decrease of my own points when I give points out, I think will be more miserly from now on.
Where I have a hard time continuing on with this logic is with regard to the downvote. I rarely downvote, but when I do, it is because someone has violated at least two of the following three:
a) been inconsistent with the ideals of this site, b) been taking my points out of context, and/or
c) just plain rude.
If I were to apply freedomforall's logic to the converse case of downvoting, I would feel like I was stealing points for myself, rather than just diminishing someone else's total justifiably.
In a real Gulch you would not just have the value you earned but the value you created where none exists before. This is, the core, of a producer based system.
We need to encourage production, not make a distribution based system.
It occurs to me that just like a real economy, there's unlimited possible value to be created. Someone created networking protocols, someone turned them into a hosting company, someone set up this site, and now we use it to create point-worthy value.