Quick poll

[Durzo Blint]

This is a really impressive analysis, Durzo. I’m glad someone finally took the time to look at the actual math of the situation.

I’ll also note that those players would be losing a lot less than what you suggested ($141m to $100m, etc). It’s a very moderate proposal, and I don’t think people fully realize that!

Thanks! But my point is not that we should bring those balances down, but I do not see the problem with them having that money or how it negatively impacts the game or other players.

[Tim Matthews]

Ok ok...eventually the cat cannot resist the string Tim is teasing us with.

I would like to be pro-tithe; however, I will take the opposite stance on the grounds that the endowment effect would, given that we are in a closed economy, result in the shrinkake of the economy as a whole, requiring larger and larger tithes to remove the appropriate amount of money in a downward spiral. Perhaps TIm and a few others (you know who you are) would care to join me in doing some regression models until we define the actual function and graph the curves while the rest of the people actually play the SIM ? Oh wait, I want to play the SIM, too. Nevermind.

https://www.cmu.edu/dietrich/sds/docs/l ... eAgent.pdf

Now THIS is an interesting addition to the conversation. Can you clarify what the endowment effect is? I have absolutely no education in this stuff lol.

Reference the sad little link provided. Classic example they teach a bunch of ways in the subject nicknamed "the dismal science" aka economics.

Okay, so I think I understand the endowment effect, sort of. Makes a lot of sense! What I'm not clear on is how this effect relates to what you said in your original post - what exactly would cause the shrinkage of the economy? Why would larger tithes be required if the economy was shrinking?

[Tim Matthews]

Taxing players bankroll is unfair. It would be a tax based on history rather than current earnings. That penalises players who save their money rather than spend it. Who is the richest player, one with a couple of million in the bank and a hundred horses capable of winning graded stakes or one with 10 - 15m in the bank but no horse capable of winning graded stakes? Perhaps they are saving to buy one special horse that will kickstart their stable by running in claimers and building their bankroll.

Thanks for the constructive feedback, Dave. I see your point. The main thing with my proposal is that it is concerned only with the total amount of money in the game. It’s unconcerned with style of play or anything like that. I think your example is a little extreme, but there are definitely players who have less money but better horses. However, richer players do tend to have better horses. So the tithe would tend to be “fair” in that sense, even though fairness is not the goal of it.

"Fairness is not the goal of it"? That says it all about your proposal. Anything brought in needs to be fair otherwise the Sim will lose players.

No, the goal of it is to remove money from the game. You remove money most efficiently by putting a higher rate on richer bankrolls, which almost universally belong to high level players. By using a progressive tithe system, it ends up being pretty fair, granted not perfectly fair (which is impossible). And who would be quitting? As I've said a number of times, the amount of money coming out from an individuals account would be basically unnoticeable.

[Tim Matthews]

This is a really impressive analysis, Durzo. I’m glad someone finally took the time to look at the actual math of the situation.

I’ll also note that those players would be losing a lot less than what you suggested ($141m to $100m, etc). It’s a very moderate proposal, and I don’t think people fully realize that!

Thanks! But my point is not that we should bring those balances down, but I do not see the problem with them having that money or how it negatively impacts the game or other players.

I think in the long run you would certainly start to see the effects of a smaller economy. I am looking at this from a game health standpoint rather than a play style standpoint. But I'm also not sure why exactly the size of the economy is a problem - I'm just assuming it is because game admin has said so.

[Dave Trainer]

I guarantee everyone will notice it.

[Kelly Haggerty]

Sidebar to Tim's main point-

In RL tax and monetary policy go together. We have an interesting case in the SIM because the cost of a GP has been pegged at one-tenth of a penny. On the exchanges the price of a SIM floats, and it's interesting sometimes to see the difference in values. Gwen Morse commented on this way back as I recall.

[Aaron Tonning]

I guess I just do not understand why money being taken out of the game is such a big deal. It is not fair to tax players that have played forever. I am not sure how much money this would take out, but all horse and lease sales should be taxed at 10% from the seller. I am in no way in favor of reducing non-stakes purses.

[LA Pepper]

There are too many million or multi million dollar races in the Sim. I believe it should be limited to Steward Cup races and possible 1-2 more, maybe making it different disaplines and breeds each year. This would also encourage the best horses to aim for the Steward Cup racess and then we get to see who really is the best.

[Danny Derby]

Crazy idea for taking money out of the game. Give us things to spend our money on.

[Andrew Chillin]

Yo, tell me what you want what you really really want

[Misty Hills]

;0\

[Gwayne's World]

Crazy idea for taking money out of the game. Give us things to spend our money on.

A lottery for Steward bred horses? $10K per entry. No limit on the number of entries.

[Rold Gold]

I’m not convinced taking money out of the game is necessary at all. The stew has said it’s a problem on many occasions but I still don’t quite get why, 95% of the time all that money is just meaningless numbers that sit in an owners account, doing exactly zero.

One thing I’m pretty sure of (again, assuming this actually is a problem) is that the give us more things to spend money on idea (not responding directly to you Danny, just to the idea) just ain’t gonna do it. Why? Because it hasn’t done it.

I joined sixteen RL years ago, this has been talked about ad nauseum since then and probably a lot longer than that. If more things to spend money on was going to solve this “problem” it would have been solved at least 10 years ago.

[Ronnie Dee]

I am definitely taking credit!

Take your L with you on the way out

By the way, your optimal move to my last posting was to not reply to my post.

Nope. Bye!

Your score is now 2. Lower scores are better with 0 being the minimum score possible. How high will your final score be?

[Ronnie Dee]

Thanks for the constructive feedback, Dave. I see your point. The main thing with my proposal is that it is concerned only with the total amount of money in the game. It’s unconcerned with style of play or anything like that. I think your example is a little extreme, but there are definitely players who have less money but better horses. However, richer players do tend to have better horses. So the tithe would tend to be “fair” in that sense, even though fairness is not the goal of it.

"Fairness is not the goal of it"? That says it all about your proposal. Anything brought in needs to be fair otherwise the Sim will lose players.

No, the goal of it is to remove money from the game. You remove money most efficiently by putting a higher rate on richer bankrolls, which almost universally belong to high level players. By using a progressive tithe system, it ends up being pretty fair, granted not perfectly fair (which is impossible). And who would be quitting? As I've said a number of times, the amount of money coming out from an individuals account would be basically unnoticeable.

If Tim was correct when he said the tithe won't happen, the number of players quitting would be 0.

If for some unexplained reason Tim's tithe plan would be enacted, a number of players would quit because of its association with Tim and his very ineffective and toxic manner at trying to convince others that his ideas have merit. By far, Tim is the worst in the Sim at the art of persuasion.