Random thoughts on citizenship, griefers, enforceability etc

[Pelanor Eldrich]

[u:4dlkbh66][b:4dlkbh66]What is a CDS citizen?[/b:4dlkbh66][/u:4dlkbh66]

As currently defined in layman's terms it's someone who owns CDS land.
This has begun to strike me as somewhat feudal. It stems from the economic reality that land is tied to USD and is thus the only real tangible asset in SL. Or is it? I'm a US citizen and so are 2 other members of my family. None of us own property in the US. Why should CDS be different?

All I've spoken to hate the following idea, but let me rehash it. What if, to become a CDS citizen you had to:

A)Notarize an oath document to obey the law.
B)Make an escrow payment of $L1,000 to the Treasurer.
C)Pay your monthly poll tax.

The poll tax is, say, 50% of the CDS land cost to LL divided by the number of CDS citizens. That percentage should be adjustable by RA bill. The remaining portion of the CDS land cost is collected from land owner in the traditional manner.

Claude brings up the point, what would I get for my tax dollar if I didn't own land? Let me harp on this just a bit.

A)The trust of new business partners in proportion to the size of your escrow.
B) A civil service with RL wages. The wage economy (>$L600/hr) allows real non-volunteer work to take place.
C)The ability to work and own land in CDS.
D)Everything you get as a citizen now.
[b:4dlkbh66]
-Alternatively what if we did it with a very low (5-10% of CDS toal land cost) to keep us with the cheapest land or no poll tax at all? [/b:4dlkbh66]

This is a very thin argument, but let's see what the economic big picture looks like.

Monthly land use fees will be the lowest in SL. The price for buying CDS land will be among the highest in SL. This will more closely approximate the RL real-estate relationship between price and property tax. I can see demand for CDS land going way up. As a result you'll have many new citizens just queueing up to buy land.

[i:4dlkbh66]But we have lower cost of entry now via microplots...[/i:4dlkbh66]

Yes, but there are a few problems with microplots.
A) There are in finite supply and in fact there are none to be had at present.

B)They do not offer sufficient enforceability. For example, Dewey Chetham and Howe wants to setup corporate HQ in NFS via microplot purchase with an unlimited liability NRC doing business (by charter) 0n non-CDS land. They advertise that they are bound by the SC and CDS law. They defraud customers of $L300k and lose a class action suit at the SC. They forfeit up their 10 cent/month microplot, are banned from the CDS and ordered to pay $L400k in restitution. They don't pay and laugh all the way to the bank. [b:4dlkbh66]Not good. That dog won't hunt.[/b:4dlkbh66]

C)We have no rental businesses of any kind allowed in the CDS. 'Nuff said. No sex, no gambling, very little retail, no rentals. It's a tough place for an entrepreneur.

If I do any kind of transaction requiring trust I'll have an escrow certificate (passport) saying "I'm a CDSer good for $L1,000 (or whatever) and I'm bound to CDS law". [b:4dlkbh66]Money escrow is alt proof[/b:4dlkbh66], in fact, it's the only enforcement mechanism which is alt proof. I want to be able to look at a unknown business partner and know he/she is good for $L25k if I win the lawsuit. That escrow money could be conservatively invested by the treasury. I like to call this my enforcability or "good for number". Land escrow is also alt proof, but you have to look up who owns what and figure out what it's worth. Bleh. Show me yours and I'll show you mine is much faster. A word about speed and pace in SL business. Contract economy is fine if it a transaction can be [b:4dlkbh66]completed quickly[/b:4dlkbh66]. All of my clients are in a tremendous hurry, the pace of SL biz is extremely fast and speed is at a premium, even on the largest deals.

At the risk of further ruining my idea, I'd like to paraphrase Ulrika. It's not enough for the law to be binding, it must have a very tight integration with SL tools and mechanisms to be enforceable.

[u:4dlkbh66][b:4dlkbh66]Jumpstarting Business/Traffic on the Marketplatz[/b:4dlkbh66][/u:4dlkbh66]

Ash's judiciary and contract economy allows wholesale/retail relationships. To prime the pump I'd recommend getting the most popular retail items dispensed from foriegn vendors on the platz *without* any payment to the CDS. This should drive foot traffic for our service industries. Shrink the fountain and put it dead center in the platz and move the CN model to adjacent to the Rauthaus where the fountain is now. Put fleamarket vendors in the platz forcing foot traffic by the stores. I'd like to sell Kendra's stuff this way.

[u:4dlkbh66][b:4dlkbh66]Handling Griefers[/b:4dlkbh66][/u:4dlkbh66]

I posted this on the forums. CDS wide XML blacklists are fine. Marshalls of the peace is a good idea. I fear they are not alt-proof and you always play catch-up. You need a serious disincentive to grief. Alts make widespread griefing possible and money is alt proof. Here's yet another stupid police-state inspired escrow idea...This may not be technically possible as I may be overlooking something.

-Must enter NFS island via a telehub located under the platz
-Hub is located in a room having a single locked door
-Door up to platz opens only if touched by a citizen (whitelist) or if door is paid say, $L250. Once paid, visitors are on the greylist. Greylisters can also open the door.
-Scanners run in the sim. We have a log of who is in the CDS, where and when. This is available to the Marshall and the SC by subpoena in the event of griefing.

Marshalls refund visitor $250 escrow when:
-Visitor requests refund and it's determined that they did not grief during the time in the CDS when escrow was held. Refunded and removed from graylist (perhaps automatically).
-Griefers forfeit escrow and are blacklisted by SC judgement.

The downside is of course the cost, ease and freedom to visit. Ever been to Ben-Gurion airport with a laptop? I'm still glad it is what it is.

[Aliasi Stonebender]

[quote="Pelanor Eldrich":djkhrq2z]
As currently defined in layman's terms it's someone who owns CDS land.
This has begun to strike me as somewhat feudal. It stems from the economic reality that land is tied to USD and is thus the only real tangible asset in SL. Or is it? I'm a US citizen and so are 2 other members of my family. None of us own property in the US. Why should CDS be different?
[/quote:djkhrq2z]

Because SL is not reality, and CDS is not the US, would be my guess. In real life, if you fail to pay your property tax, your land does not vanish into the ether.

[quote:djkhrq2z]
Yes, but there are a few problems with microplots.
A) There are in finite supply and in fact there are none to be had at present.
[/quote:djkhrq2z]

Actually, we do have some at present...

[quote:djkhrq2z]
B)They do not offer sufficient enforceability. For example, Dewey Chetham and Howe wants to setup corporate HQ in NFS via microplot purchase with an unlimited liability NRC doing business (by charter) 0n non-CDS land. They advertise that they are bound by the SC and CDS law. They defraud customers of $L300k and lose a class action suit at the SC. They forfeit up their 10 cent/month microplot, are banned from the CDS and ordered to pay $L400k in restitution. They don't pay and laugh all the way to the bank. [b:djkhrq2z]Not good. That dog won't hunt.[/b:djkhrq2z]
[/quote:djkhrq2z]

It is not the CDS' responsibility to ensure that consumers have half a brain. Only a business with an escrow or with significant amounts of land in NFS is truly bound.

[quote:djkhrq2z]
-Must enter NFS island via a telehub located under the platz
-Hub is located in a room having a single locked door
-Door up to platz opens only if touched by a citizen (whitelist) or if door is paid say, $L250. Once paid, visitors are on the greylist. Greylisters can also open the door.
-Scanners run in the sim. We have a log of who is in the CDS, where and when. This is available to the Marshall and the SC by subpoena in the event of griefing.

Marshalls refund visitor $250 escrow when:
-Visitor requests refund and it's determined that they did not grief during the time in the CDS when escrow was held. Refunded and removed from graylist (perhaps automatically).
-Griefers forfeit escrow and are blacklisted by SC judgement.

The downside is of course the cost, ease and freedom to visit. Ever been to Ben-Gurion airport with a laptop? I'm still glad it is what it is.[/quote:djkhrq2z]

Yeah... I'm thinking not just no, but HELL no. I'd sooner turn off scripts and collisions simwide, neatly removing all the tools a griefer could use. And I'm not wild about [i:djkhrq2z]that[/i:djkhrq2z] idea.

[Chicago Kipling]

Sometimes we build systems to deal with eventual problems. That's fine to a point. Near as I can tell in my short experience though, these things would only serve to further narrow the number of visitors we have. Can you actually substantiate a significant number of problems that have caused serious sim-wide problems that this would address?

[Pelanor Eldrich]

We don't have anywhere near enough griefing to justify the customs system. If we had massive terrorism, the customs approach would be the only bulletproof way to secure the sim. And it's not secure if griefers wanted to sacrifice escrow.

Still, one time non-citizen payment aside, how hard is it to walk through a door?

During WWIII we would, in the customs scenario, limit access to citizens only (whitelisting). We can't turn off scripts sim wide, I fear that would cripple the commercial economy and vital gov't services.

I didn't think customs would fly. Any beefs with the citizenship/platz stuff? Plenty of people want to do business with a structured legal system without paying a monthly fee. My citizenship proposal (without poll tax) provides this. With a poll tax, it provides a cheap way not bound by microplot availability. It actually makes Sudane's life easier not to have 500 people wanting microplot deeds and keeping track of their monthly payments.

BTW I feel it is the CDS reponsibilty to enforce its own law. Stupid customers or no. When the SC rules pay $L400k, I want to be goddamn sure the guilty party pays $L400k or forfeits the equivalent. Otherwise we simply don't have a legal system, we have wonks roleplaying in anarchy. The customer should be able to very easily see that Joe Merchant is good for $L5k only and behave accordingly. In the case of loaning $L, the merchant can do likewise.

Welcome back Ali! You're my favorite SL anarchist!

[Ashcroft Burnham]

[quote="Pelanor Eldrich":3uqdksvt][u:3uqdksvt][b:3uqdksvt]What is a CDS citizen?[/b:3uqdksvt][/u:3uqdksvt]

As currently defined in layman's terms it's someone who owns CDS land.
This has begun to strike me as somewhat feudal. It stems from the economic reality that land is tied to USD and is thus the only real tangible asset in SL. Or is it? I'm a US citizen and so are 2 other members of my family. None of us own property in the US. Why should CDS be different?[/quote:3uqdksvt]

Is there anything terribly wrong with being a little bit feudal? I suggested somewhere in my untapped potential of franchulates post that franchulate holders with large amounts of land be required to be, or to provide, marshals of the peace for that area of land. That is even [i:3uqdksvt]more[/i:3uqdksvt] feudal, but it serves a practical purpose.

[quote:3uqdksvt]All I've spoken to hate the following idea, but let me rehash it. What if, to become a CDS citizen you had to:

A)Notarize an oath document to obey the law.
B)Make an escrow payment of $L1,000 to the Treasurer.
C)Pay your monthly poll tax.

The poll tax is, say, 50% of the CDS land cost to LL divided by the number of CDS citizens. That percentage should be adjustable by RA bill. The remaining portion of the CDS land cost is collected from land owner in the traditional manner.[/quote:3uqdksvt]

The land-escrow enforcement mechanism is one reason for having land tied to citizenship: the other is to foster a sense of geographic community. What incentive, for example, would people have to enfranchulate, and trust their [i:3uqdksvt]land[/i:3uqdksvt] to us, when, for a measely L$1,000, they could become a full citizen and advertise themselves as being CDS-enforcable?

Just as in feudal times in the real world, in SecondLife, land has a central importance to the economy and to society. Indeed, in many cases, a person's land is far more valuable to that person than the price for which another person would buy it because (1) if there is a business on it, there may be significant business goodwill; and (2) the layout of objects, buildings etc. on that land might have taken a great deal of time and effort to achieve. People can often have a [i:3uqdksvt]sentimental[/i:3uqdksvt] commitment to land that makes a threat to part people from it a much more powerful threat than to part them from a sum of money.

The other reason that it is more effective to enforce against land is that, if we get enough franchulated citizens on the mainland, being banished from [i:3uqdksvt]all[/i:3uqdksvt] CDS land might be a significant punishment in itself because of the amount of land from which one would be banned. If not everyone who wanted to be a citizen had to have land, then the liklihood is that there would be less CDS land out there.

However, you do make a valid point about microplots. The idea, I think, was to enable people to become citizens cheaply. That is, of course, fundementally incompatible with effective enforcability at all: we must, therefore, choose between the two. If we choose againt microlots, we should probably allow existing microplot holders to stay.

[quote:3uqdksvt]Claude brings up the point, what would I get for my tax dollar if I didn't own land? Let me harp on this just a bit.

A)The trust of new business partners in proportion to the size of your escrow.
B) A civil service with RL wages. The wage economy (>$L600/hr) allows real non-volunteer work to take place.
C)The ability to work and own land in CDS.
D)Everything you get as a citizen now.
[b:3uqdksvt]
-Alternatively what if we did it with a very low (5-10% of CDS toal land cost) to keep us with the cheapest land or no poll tax at all? [/b:3uqdksvt]

This is a very thin argument, but let's see what the economic big picture looks like.

Monthly land use fees will be the lowest in SL. The price for buying CDS land will be among the highest in SL. This will more closely approximate the RL real-estate relationship between price and property tax. I can see demand for CDS land going way up. As a result you'll have many new citizens just queueing up to buy land.[/quote:3uqdksvt]

Why buy land, though, from us, rather than being a non-landholding citizen?

[quote:3uqdksvt]If I do any kind of transaction requiring trust I'll have an escrow certificate (passport) saying "I'm a CDSer good for $L1,000 (or whatever) and I'm bound to CDS law". [b:3uqdksvt]Money escrow is alt proof[/b:3uqdksvt], in fact, it's the only enforcement mechanism which is alt proof.[/quote:3uqdksvt]

It is no better than land escrow. As stated above, land can have a (sometimes considerably) greater value for the landowner than its market value.

[quote:3uqdksvt]I want to be able to look at a unknown business partner and know he/she is good for $L25k if I win the lawsuit. That escrow money could be conservatively invested by the treasury. I like to call this my enforcability or "good for number". Land escrow is also alt proof, but you have to look up who owns what and figure out what it's worth. Bleh. Show me yours and I'll show you mine is much faster.[/quote:3uqdksvt]

Another thought about money vs. land escrow: with land escrow, people are getting something tangiable in return for their money: land. The value of the transaction is more obvious. There is greater incentive to put the capital into escrow in the first place. A money escrow might be too high a bar to entry for many if there is nothing tangiable in return. A lot of people, for example, just want to buy a bit of land on one of our island sims, set up a shop, and not really think too much about government or law unless and until they need it. It should still be possible to expand our citizenship this way.

[quote:3uqdksvt]A word about speed and pace in SL business. Contract economy is fine if it a transaction can be [b:3uqdksvt]completed quickly[/b:3uqdksvt]. All of my clients are in a tremendous hurry, the pace of SL biz is extremely fast and speed is at a premium, even on the largest deals.

At the risk of further ruining my idea, I'd like to paraphrase Ulrika. It's not enough for the law to be binding, it must have a very tight integration with SL tools and mechanisms to be enforceable.[/quote:3uqdksvt]

That is indeed true: those two reasons are no doubt why people like Sudane are working so hard on things such as the land management system, and why the new group and estate tools are so good for us.

[quote:3uqdksvt][u:3uqdksvt][b:3uqdksvt]Jumpstarting Business/Traffic on the Marketplatz[/b:3uqdksvt][/u:3uqdksvt]

Ash's judiciary and contract economy allows wholesale/retail relationships. To prime the pump I'd recommend getting the most popular retail items dispensed from foriegn vendors on the platz *without* any payment to the CDS. This should drive foot traffic for our service industries. Shrink the fountain and put it dead center in the platz and move the CN model to adjacent to the Rauthaus where the fountain is now. Put fleamarket vendors in the platz forcing foot traffic by the stores. I'd like to sell Kendra's stuff this way.[/quote:3uqdksvt]

Loss leaders, intriguing. Could work. A flea-market might make the Platz look a little too crowded, though, and so many people remark when they visit us how beautiful that our sim is compared to others. Perhaps the flea market could be in Old Altenburg? That area needs something to liven it up. I'd make signposts directing people there.

[quote:3uqdksvt][u:3uqdksvt][b:3uqdksvt]Handling Griefers[/b:3uqdksvt][/u:3uqdksvt]

I posted this on the forums. CDS wide XML blacklists are fine. Marshalls of the peace is a good idea. I fear they are not alt-proof and you always play catch-up. You need a serious disincentive to grief. Alts make widespread griefing possible and money is alt proof. Here's yet another stupid police-state inspired escrow idea...This may not be technically possible as I may be overlooking something.

-Must enter NFS island via a telehub located under the platz
-Hub is located in a room having a single locked door
-Door up to platz opens only if touched by a citizen (whitelist) or if door is paid say, $L250. Once paid, visitors are on the greylist. Greylisters can also open the door.
-Scanners run in the sim. We have a log of who is in the CDS, where and when. This is available to the Marshall and the SC by subpoena in the event of griefing.

Marshalls refund visitor $250 escrow when:
-Visitor requests refund and it's determined that they did not grief during the time in the CDS when escrow was held. Refunded and removed from graylist (perhaps automatically).
-Griefers forfeit escrow and are blacklisted by SC judgement.

The downside is of course the cost, ease and freedom to visit. Ever been to Ben-Gurion airport with a laptop? I'm still glad it is what it is.[/quote:3uqdksvt]

I think that, as Aliasi pointed out, the above is a little too draconian, and will likely discourage visitors more than griefers would. But, as you say, it might be a worthwhile fallback if griefing becomes far, far more serious than it is now.

Incidentally, surely (if all goes well) it would be Couts of Common Jurisdiction, and not the Scientific Council dealing with banishment and forfieture?

[Pelanor Eldrich]

Thanks for everyone's replies. So to sum up so far:

[b:m4k7h5pg]Customs:[/b:m4k7h5pg] Too draconian, we'll think about it if we get a sustained terrorist threat/attack.

[b:m4k7h5pg]Citizenship: [/b:m4k7h5pg] Land escrow vs. $L escrow. My main purpose here is to have an easy way to see the USD value escrow held by a business partner. Land works for many reasons. It does incur slightly more overhead in valuation in the form of deeds, market value vs. CDS reclaim value. What zone is it in? How much land is it? Everyone understands $L5k and it's liquid. If I have a bottom line $L value to my escrow I can use a script to look at the Lindex USD value. In the case of forfeiture the mechanics of reclaiming land are more involved than simply doing nothing and holding the forfeited escrowed $L.

There was also a concern about creating second class enfranchulated renters. They are full citizens and not serfs if they have a path to citizenship without owning land. Without some other form of escrow legal decisions against a renter are difficult to effectively enforce.

Ashcroft raises the opposite point from Claude. Claude asked me, why on earth would I not buy land? What would I get for my tax $L? That's assuming we use the poll tax. Ash asks, why buy land when I can make a one time payment or a onetime payment in addition to a small monthly payment?

Economic flexibility. Some residents require land for sandboxing, building, hosting vendors or the myriad other reasons SL residents desire land. Interestingly Anshe Chung was homeless for a year while running her real-estate empire. So if she wanted to join the CDS her hypothetical CDS choice at that point was to escrow $L5M or buy 5 islands governed by her as estate owner. Why not give her the choice? In fact we do so now. She could buy a microplot and then register a limited liability NRC with $L5M in escrow. Why not just cutout the land ownership requirement? It's less work for Sudane and less hassle for the citizen. The new land management system makes things easier, but why have 500 deeded microplot holders at all? The mircoplot is a workaround given the citizenship requirement. If we had a low poll tax CDS could collect that money from non-land owners. No one does business on a microplot and certainly it's not worth anything in addition to itself. That's not the same as a nice house on 512m2. You can't build or host scripts on a microplot.

[b:m4k7h5pg]Subletting: [/b:m4k7h5pg]Yes, allow landowners to rent to tenants. So in reality the EO (Rudeen) owns land which is deeded to Citizen A who rents to either Citizen B or Foreigner C. Do we allow rental to Foreigner C? Do we allow Citizen B to sublease to Citizen D?

The 3 flavors of CDS...
-Private Island sims bought by CDS as Terra Nullis
-Private Island Provinces or Franchulates annexed by CDS
-Mainland Franchulates

I like Ash's labels, I just can't remember them. Why not annex Caledon? Desmond offered to buy Neualtenburg, I'd like to return the favor.

[b:m4k7h5pg]Local Gov't:[/b:m4k7h5pg] Yes, CDS laws and constitution. I just fear "my way or the highway" might discourage political groups who have their own working democratic systems and institutions from joining the CDS.

[Ashcroft Burnham]

[quote="Pelanor Eldrich":1obrh2vp]
[b:1obrh2vp]Citizenship: [/b:1obrh2vp] Land escrow vs. $L escrow. My main purpose here is to have an easy way to see the USD value escrow held by a business partner. Land works for many reasons. It does incur slightly more overhead in valuation in the form of deeds, market value vs. CDS reclaim value. What zone is it in? How much land is it? Everyone understands $L5k and it's liquid. If I have a bottom line $L value to my escrow I can use a script to look at the Lindex USD value. In the case of forfeiture the mechanics of reclaiming land are more involved than simply doing nothing and holding the forfeited escrowed $L.[/quote:1obrh2vp]

Flexibility is good up to a point, but what about the advantages to [i:1obrh2vp]us[/i:1obrh2vp] of all of our citizens holding land that I outlined above?

[quote:1obrh2vp]There was also a concern about creating second class enfranchulated renters. They are full citizens and not serfs if they have a path to citizenship without owning land.[/quote:1obrh2vp]

I am not sure how that would work.

[quote:1obrh2vp]I like Ash's labels, I just can't remember them. Why not annex Caledon? Desmond offered to buy Neualtenburg, I'd like to return the favor. [/quote:1obrh2vp]

[b:1obrh2vp]States[/b:1obrh2vp], [b:1obrh2vp]provinces[/b:1obrh2vp] and [b:1obrh2vp]boroughs[/b:1obrh2vp]. Do you really think that Desmond would want to surrender any soverignty, given the success of his empire so far?

[quote:1obrh2vp][b:1obrh2vp]Local Gov't:[/b:1obrh2vp] Yes, CDS laws and constitution. I just fear "my way or the highway" might discourage political groups who have their own working democratic systems and institutions from joining the CDS.[/quote:1obrh2vp]

Do we really [i:1obrh2vp]want[/i:1obrh2vp] to annexe any political groups who have their own working democratic systems and institutions, though? Is that not a recipe for intractable conflict? I cannot in any event imagine any coherent way of having our constitution without also having our law. We are probably better of building a community where we are all subject to the same laws (save for local planning regulations and the like) than one with a series of conflicting legal systems and multiple sets of conflicting laws. People need to know, after all, what it means to be in the CDS, which includes knowing what rules that everybody is bound by. We need to present a united front to potential citizens. We do not make ourselves any bigger by being wider but less deep.

[Pelanor Eldrich]

[quote:24qutfib]Flexibility is good up to a point, but what about the advantages to [i:24qutfib]us[/i:24qutfib] of all of our citizens holding land that I outlined above?[/quote:24qutfib]

Yes, sense of community is important as well as the goodwill fostered by properly developed land. I don't think that suddenly people will forego their land. In fact, with a poll tax we can offer discounted land thereby increasing demand. I'm not sure I can overstate the economic attraction of $L15+/m2 purchase price land which carries 50-95% of the best monthly land use fee. It would be a bonanza of real estate speculation with CDS pocketing the citizen to citizen transaction fee. The vast majority of RL and SL immigrants are economic migrants.

[quote:24qutfib]There was also a concern about creating second class enfranchulated renters. They are full citizens and not serfs if they have a path to citizenship without owning land.

I am not sure how that would work.[/quote:24qutfib]

Actually I thought that was your franchulate subleasing scenario and I agree it would not work. It would require $L escrow in lieu of land escrow. Forgive me if I misunderstood.

[quote:24qutfib][b:24qutfib]States[/b:24qutfib], [b:24qutfib]provinces[/b:24qutfib] and [b:24qutfib]boroughs[/b:24qutfib]. Do you really think that Desmond would want to surrender any soverignty, given the success of his empire so far?[/quote:24qutfib]

No but you're right we need embassies and ambassadors and good communication.

[quote:24qutfib][b:24qutfib]Local Gov't:[/b:24qutfib] Yes, CDS laws and constitution. I just fear "my way or the highway" might discourage political groups who have their own working democratic systems and institutions from joining the CDS.[/quote:24qutfib]

[quote:24qutfib]Do we really [i:24qutfib]want[/i:24qutfib] to annexe any political groups who have their own working democratic systems and institutions, though? Is that not a recipe for intractable conflict? I cannot in any event imagine any coherent way of having our constitution without also having our law. We are probably better of building a community where we are all subject to the same laws (save for local planning regulations and the like) than one with a series of conflicting legal systems and multiple sets of conflicting laws. People need to know, after all, what it means to be in the CDS, which includes knowing what rules that everybody is bound by. We need to present a united front to potential citizens. We do not make ourselves any bigger by being wider but less deep.[/quote:24qutfib]

Maybe devolve a very small set of powers to the provinces like planning and policing as you suggest. Perhaps also the title of the provincial "premier". So if you wanted to be the Right Honourable Gorean Alpha She-Bitch of the CDS province of Kalamazoo (or whatever) you could be. Also, what are the rights and procedures regarding choosing a new praetor/premier and what about the right and procedure for declaring independence from the CDS?

[Ranma Tardis]

The current system of land ownership to be a citizen is best for our citizens. If Second Life Residents could become citizens without land it could be abusive. It could be used to influence elections. Also a group of outsiders could come into Neufreistadt and win a election and then use the power of the goverment to take the land from the landowners through the power of the goverment.
This is not a good ideal and should be rejected outright.

[Pelanor Eldrich]

[quote="Ranma Tardis":165bogq6]The current system of land ownership to be a citizen is best for our citizens. If Second Life Residents could become citizens without land it could be abusive. It could be used to influence elections. Also a group of outsiders could come into Neufreistadt and win a election and then use the power of the goverment to take the land from the landowners through the power of the goverment.
This is not a good ideal and should be rejected outright.[/quote:165bogq6]

Actually this is a very good point Ranma. I used this tactic a bit in the last election. Several of my constituents are microplotters who don't spend a great deal of time in NFS.

So this problem already exists with microplots. You can bus load in a bunch of residents who buy microplots, vote for you to win the election and never set foot in the CDS again.

So the solution is to either raise the price and monthly fee of microplots to something on the order of $L1k with $L100+/month land use fee or to require $L1-3k escrow with no land requirement. As it stands unless we create more microplots we effectively have an upper limit of 50-60 citizens per island. This also, with the exception of service charges that are not currently collecting, caps the CDS monthly revenue (tax base) at land use fees only. If we had 500 poll taxed citizens in NFS we'd collect more money despite having no new land owners.

What interests me about this debate is the similarity to the franchulate debate. Some in the DPU seems more conservative with the franchulate and the citizenship approach, i.e. don't change stuff or change it in small increments. Some in the CSDF looks at these two issues and says, effectively, they are a solution to a problem that doesn't exist because they don't go *far enough*. Very interesting.

The problem with raising these fees is that while you have less abuse and better legal enforcement, the barrier to new citizenship is higher. This hurdle might be overcome if we have a low or no poll tax on citizens because the monthly payment is low or zero for landless citizens.

I would hope that some of the checks and balances like impeachment and veto would stop a land grab by a power hungry LRA and Chancellor. Our European citizens must note that land reclamation is a very hot political button in the US right now. The thought of gov't seizing citizen owned land for private development appals a large segment of the American populace.

I realize this is a contentious debate which was argued ad nauseum by the founders before my arrival in the CDS. Just thought I'd throw it out there yet again. With the possible exception of Jon, I don't think anyone other than myself wants landless citizens.

[Claude Desmoulins]

To be fair to Pel, what many of the microplot owning citizens really want is to place their mainland land and business operations within our legal system. It may well be that now that a protectorate/franchulate/whatever we end up calling it mechanism exists, they will be more involved.

I agree with Pel that the current microplot system is as easily gamed as the one he proposes, perhaps more easily, since the buy in is low. So what if you get exiled, you're only out 0.40 USD + 0.09 USD /month.

That said, I'm not crazy about landless citizens, just agreeing that microplots open you up to the same sort of manipulation that landless citizens would.

[Ashcroft Burnham]

[quote="Pelanor Eldrich":ly0ng1d9]Yes, sense of community is important as well as the goodwill fostered by properly developed land. I don't think that suddenly people will forego their land. In fact, with a poll tax we can offer discounted land thereby increasing demand. I'm not sure I can overstate the economic attraction of $L15+/m2 purchase price land which carries 50-95% of the best monthly land use fee. It would be a bonanza of real estate speculation with CDS pocketing the citizen to citizen transaction fee. The vast majority of RL and SL immigrants are economic migrants.[/quote:ly0ng1d9]

The issue of land pricing and taxation is a little different, though, to the question of what should count as prerequisites for citizenship. All of the advantages of that pricing structure could exist equally whilst retaining land-ownership as a citizenship requirement.

There are some substantial problems to money-escrow as a means of enforcement. Firstly, money held in escrow cannot be [i:ly0ng1d9]used[/i:ly0ng1d9], as land can, by the person who puts it into escrow. That means that the only circumstances in which the person will ever get to see that money again, or get any value from it again, is if he or she leaves the CDS without being banished. That means that, if the person [i:ly0ng1d9]is[/i:ly0ng1d9] banished, he or she is in [i:ly0ng1d9]no worse position[/i:ly0ng1d9] than if he or she remained in the CDS indefinitely.

That is not so with land. Land can be [i:ly0ng1d9]used[/i:ly0ng1d9] by the person whose land it is both for personal enjoyment and to generate income. A peson [i:ly0ng1d9]is[/i:ly0ng1d9] in a worse position if her or his shop is suddenly taken over by the CDS because he or she has (for example) not paid a fine, than if he or she continued to be a member of the CDS.

Furthermore, the idea of a "good for" figure is not as useful as you think that it is. Suppose a person became a citizen with an escrow of L$10k, and set up a business involving high-value contracted transactions on her or his own (non-CDS) land, advertising her or himself as falling under the CDS jurisdiction. Suppose that five people each entered L$5k transactions with that person (thinking that he was "good for" twice that amount), each paying in advance. Suppose further that our businessman defaulted on all of the transactions, and was then banished by the CDS. He has lost L$10k and gained L$25k, and can continue to use his land and trade as if nothing had happened. The creditors would all have to share the L$10k between them. Few people would (or should) trust the CDS if this did or could happen. We cannot guaruntee perfect enforcement now, of course, but at least, if someone is trading as CDS-enforcable, we should be able to take away the person's place of business if that person defaults on court orders.

[quote:ly0ng1d9]Actually I thought that was your franchulate subleasing scenario and I agree it would not work. It would require $L escrow in lieu of land escrow. Forgive me if I misunderstood.[/quote:ly0ng1d9]

I am not sure that I follow... start from the beginning again?

[quote:ly0ng1d9]No but you're right we need embassies and ambassadors and good communication.[/quote:ly0ng1d9]

I quite agree. I know that he's open to that idea.

[quote:ly0ng1d9]Maybe devolve a very small set of powers to the provinces like planning and policing as you suggest. Perhaps also the title of the provincial "premier". So if you wanted to be the Right Honourable Gorean Alpha She-Bitch of the CDS province of Kalamazoo (or whatever) you could be.[/quote:ly0ng1d9]

Yes, indeed: a presumption of uniformity of law, rebuttable by local governmental institutions making their own "bylaws", their powers for doing so (and therefore the scope of possible bylaws that they could create) being set by the national government. And the leader of a province, state or borough should be called a "governer" unless a specific local arrangement gives that person a different name: in other words, "governer" ought be the default title, and generic word for describing that class of rulers. And I doubt that we are likely to be compatible with the Goreans.

[quote:ly0ng1d9]Also, what are the rights and procedures regarding choosing a new praetor/premier[/quote:ly0ng1d9]

Governor? It is probably best for the national government to set the structure of the local government independently in each instance, although there could be a default template for provincial or borough government. This approach would allow for maximum flexibility.

[quote:ly0ng1d9]...and what about the right and procedure for declaring independence from the CDS?[/quote:ly0ng1d9]

Why on earth would we want to let people do that?

[Ashcroft Burnham]

[quote="Claude Desmoulins":3kztdb7c]To be fair to Pel, what many of the microplot owning citizens really want is to place their mainland land and business operations within our legal system. It may well be that now that a protectorate/franchulate/whatever we end up calling it mechanism exists, they will be more involved.

I agree with Pel that the current microplot system is as easily gamed as the one he proposes, perhaps more easily, since the buy in is low. So what if you get exiled, you're only out 0.40 USD + 0.09 USD /month.

That said, I'm not crazy about landless citizens, just agreeing that microplots open you up to the same sort of manipulation that landless citizens would.[/quote:3kztdb7c]

That seems to me to be an argument to abolish microplots entirely (or, at least, not let anybody new buy any). As you suggest, franchulates (or whatever we end up calling them) solve better the problem that microplots were supposed to solve.

[Aliasi Stonebender]

[quote="Ashcroft Burnham":39qu8ubq][quote:39qu8ubq]...and what about the right and procedure for declaring independence from the CDS?[/quote:39qu8ubq]

Why on earth would we want to let people do that?[/quote:39qu8ubq]

Better to work it out now than let it come to drama later. Furthermore, I feel [i:39qu8ubq]very strongly[/i:39qu8ubq] that an inherent part of a social contract such as that which makes up the CDS is the ability to honorably end it at some point. It's entirely possible, as we expand, that differences may arise to the point that someone wishes to split off. We had a rough enough time with the affair that resulted in Port Neualtenburg; while the situation was unique I do not think the underlying scenario is.

[Pelanor Eldrich]

[quote:27a15m88]The issue of land pricing and taxation is a little different, though, to the question of what should count as prerequisites for citizenship. All of the advantages of that pricing structure could exist equally whilst retaining land-ownership as a citizenship requirement.

There are some substantial problems to money-escrow as a means of enforcement. Firstly, money held in escrow cannot be [i:27a15m88]used[/i:27a15m88], as land can, by the person who puts it into escrow. That means that the only circumstances in which the person will ever get to see that money again, or get any value from it again, is if he or she leaves the CDS without being banished. That means that, if the person [i:27a15m88]is[/i:27a15m88] banished, he or she is in [i:27a15m88]no worse position[/i:27a15m88] than if he or she remained in the CDS indefinitely.

That is not so with land. Land can be [i:27a15m88]used[/i:27a15m88] by the person whose land it is both for personal enjoyment and to generate income. A peson [i:27a15m88]is[/i:27a15m88] in a worse position if her or his shop is suddenly taken over by the CDS because he or she has (for example) not paid a fine, than if he or she continued to be a member of the CDS.[/quote:27a15m88]

Yes, note a few obvious things. Microplots don't count as land in this case, you can't use them for anything. Also, lang is fungible. It's very easy to relocate a store on another island or mainland. Given teleporting and large inventories as well as relatively quick relocation times the old location, location, location maxim is not as applicable here in SL.

The citizen cannot use the $L escrow during this period. However the CDS *can* and *should* invest these monies conservatively despite the fact that they are booked as long term liabilities.

Let's look at the enforcement scenario. You violate the law and don't pay restitution per the judgement. You lose the escrow, land if you have it, and are likely CDS blacklisted/banished. In the scenario where you leave the CDS on good terms, you sell your land and reclaim your escrow and can come back.

So it's pretty obvious that an effective restitution levied cannot be greater than the percieved cost of leaving (sum of land owned plus escrow plus other intagible cost of leaving).

[quote:27a15m88]Furthermore, the idea of a "good for" figure is not as useful as you think that it is. Suppose a person became a citizen with an escrow of L$10k, and set up a business involving high-value contracted transactions on her or his own (non-CDS) land, advertising her or himself as falling under the CDS jurisdiction. Suppose that five people each entered L$5k transactions with that person (thinking that he was "good for" twice that amount), each paying in advance. Suppose further that our businessman defaulted on all of the transactions, and was then banished by the CDS. He has lost L$10k and gained L$25k, and can continue to use his land and trade as if nothing had happened. The creditors would all have to share the L$10k between them. Few people would (or should) trust the CDS if this did or could happen. We cannot guaruntee perfect enforcement now, of course, but at least, if someone is trading as CDS-enforcable, we should be able to take away the person's place of business if that person defaults on court orders.[/quote:27a15m88]

The "good for" number gives me at least *something* to look at. I at least will know not to loan this guy more than $L10k on a given transaction. Now, how much escrow should a business be required to hold? That depends on the honesty of the finanicial reporting submitted to the Chancellor. It should probably be the estimated next 30 days of gross revenue. If a decision requires restitution larger than escrow amount and the guilty business pays it then the required monthly escrow should automatically be raised to that level.

What I must do now to lend $L is to escrow land and guess what, many clients do not own mainland and so I cannot lend to them. I'd lend to a customer with a good "good for" number and ideally with some kind of solid SL credit history.

This is by no means perfect. Gov't here has no real access to income records and so any kind of income tax is pretty impossible to implement.

[quote:27a15m88]I am not sure that I follow... start from the beginning again?[/quote:27a15m88]

Ok I think it's the semantics of owner vs. renter etc.
From the LL standpoint:

-The EO owns the franchulate
-The landlord franchulate citizen rents from the EO. This is what all CDS citizens currently do in NFS.
-A citizen owning no land subleases (or rents) from the landlord franchulate citizen. Now, this is effectively a tenant/landless citizen. My understanding is that we don't want landless citizens. This scenario doesn't work without some other form of escrow such as $L in lieu of deeded land or a plot must be owned elsewhere in the CDS by the tenant.

Alternatively we could call it a formal sublease and both landlord and tenant "own" the same plot for the purposes of citizenship. That's a bit too mindbending even for me. Poor Sudane's database.

Yes, governor should be the default.

[quote:27a15m88]...and what about the right and procedure for declaring independence from the CDS?

Why on earth would we want to let people do that?[/quote:27a15m88]

The case studies of Canada and Port Neualtenburg. Much nastiness and divisive acrimony could have been avoided by agreeing to ground rules laid out in advance. BTW Ash, I do appreciate your excellent commentary on some of these admittedly half-baked schemes of mine. I suffer from the problem of 100 ideas a day with 1% worthwhile (and I can never figure out which 1% is the good one). We need as many devil's advocates as possbile around here. I assume you've read Frank Lardner's law society forum posts on contract enforcement.