Besides these, there were many other unexpected situations.
For example, after establishing a proposal to save unconditionally, what if a player entered a ga with no fear and deliberately courted death for personal gain, causing the immunity ticket to be aninglessly wasted?
The more reckless people were, the more they would prioritize enjoying the immunity ticket, which was obviously wrong but if they voted every ti, there obviously wouldn’t be enough ti.
Simply put, "when the immunity ticket should be used" was a dynamic problem with overly complex influencing factors. There was no way to strictly constrain it with proposal rules, they could only rely on human subjective judgnt.
Xu Tong first suggested, "How about queuing based on contributions to purchasing this ticket?
"For example, if two players need it simultaneously, the one who contributed more gets priority.
"After one player uses it, they must supplent the 300,000 difference needed to buy the immunity ticket to the luxury goods fund before they can continue queuing."
Li Renshu shook her head, "No, because ’two players simultaneously needing the immunity ticket’ is itself an extrely rare situation.
"If it really happens simultaneously, we just save the one with greater contributions, no one would object.
"But if two players encounter danger one after another, your queuing system wouldn’t be very useful, and the key to this problem wasn’t about visa ti in the first place."
Yang Yuting tentatively asked, "Then what if we set a threshold, like requiring at least a certain percentage contribution to qualify for immunity ticket usage?"
Cai Zhiyuan also said, "Actually, many online gas have ’auction’ chanisms for precious items like this.
"We could also consider internal community auctions, highest bidder wins, then redistribute the auction money to the weak within the community.
"This way, even if the strong keep hoarding the immunity ticket without using it, they at least pay large amounts of visa ti, and the weak don’t co away empty-handed."
Lin Sizhi was silent for a mont, then said, "But online gas that adopt similar ’gold group modes’ all encountered a very serious problem.
"The environnt quickly becos very hostile with no tolerance for newcors. Most people start calculating their own gains and losses, and players on the sa team are no longer unconditionally trustworthy partners but beco purely colleague relationships.
"Money deducted for mistakes, money deducted for being late, even blood brothers must settle accounts clearly. Cases of turning against each other over one auction are everywhere.
"Immunity tickets are more precious than rare items in gas, so the impact would naturally be greater.
"If everyone hopes Community 17 also becos that kind of state, we could consider this plan."
Li Renshu looked at everyone and silently shook her head.
Obviously, these two plans proposed by Yang Yuting and Cai Zhiyuan had a common problem, making it difficult to reach consensus in the community.
This problem was that such usage thods seriously violated Community 17’s fundantal values.
Yang Yuting’s thod definitely wouldn’t work, Cai Zhiyuan’s was slightly better but would also bury major hidden dangers because the appearance and use of immunity tickets were themselves part of "community welfare."
That is to say, immunity tickets couldn’t be treated purely as "ordinary commodities purchased by the strong for 300,000," their appearance was itself a result of "community building."
Community building included political activities within the community, proposal and system construction, players’ social relationships, personnel structure adjustnts made to optimize diversity and knowledge structures, and so on.
All of these were completed jointly by all community mbers.
Just as every player had a fair vote in all proposals, immunity tickets as special commodities were part of community welfare, and every player should rightfully enjoy part of the usage rights.
Using contribution thresholds to restrict usage qualifications, or converting immunity tickets into so player’s private property through auctions, could both factually cause oppression of the weak by the strong.
Once the weak beca dissatisfied, they would unite to use proposals to teach the strong how to behave.
Under the one-person-one-vote chanism, the strong weren’t free to do whatever they wanted.
Moreover, Community 17 from its establishnt wasn’t a system favoring social Darwinism, it had always advocated protection of the weak, tolerance, and diversity principles.
If they seriously violated previous principles in using this ticket, the stability they had worked so hard to establish might instantly collapse.
Immunity tickets had to be used as much as possible.
They couldn’t directly or indirectly deprive the weak of usage rights in any way.
The strong who contributed more could get certain priority, but this priority had to be limited.
They absolutely couldn’t allow situations like "the strong hoarding immunity tickets without giving others use when they have no life-threatening danger."
Wang Yongxin let out a long breath, "After all this discussion, there’s actually only one optimal way to use this ticket.
"We select one person and authorize them to manage this immunity ticket.
"When it needs to be used, they make the decision themselves.
"If we’re unsatisfied with their decisions, we’ll change to soone else next ti."
Wang Yongxin actually didn’t want to propose this plan, because he knew that even if they really adopted this plan, the person selected to manage the immunity ticket definitely wouldn’t be himself.
But he had no choice, because this was the conclusion everyone would inevitably reach after discussing to the end, and he couldn’t stop it.
More importantly, if they didn’t choose this plan but selected other plans, like mandatorily stipulating that certain types of people get priority use of immunity tickets, or unconditionally giving it to the first person with death risk, or having one person buy the immunity ticket and distribute money to others...
Much worse situations might occur.
The weak might desire this immunity ticket even more than the strong, and according to the principle that the fortunate should yield, the strong had to make appropriate concessions, which was unavoidable.
As long as everyone was still in the sa community, each controlling one vote, they had to consider everyone’s opinions.
Lin Sizhi added a key question, "Then in using this ticket, should we also grant so people ’veto power’?
"Or we could simultaneously grant multiple people ’usage rights’ and ’veto power.’
"For example, if one of three people agrees, the ticket can be used.
"Or if any one of three people clearly disagrees, the ticket cannot be used."
Everyone fell silent again, obviously this problem was becoming increasingly complex.
After serious consideration, Cai Zhiyuan said, "How about this, I’ll propose a plan, everyone consider whether it’s suitable.
"One person manages usage rights, two people have veto power.
"I think multiple people having usage rights isn’t a good idea. In that situation, people inclined to ’actively use immunity tickets’ would substantially gain greater power, leading to overly casual tendencies in immunity ticket usage."
User Comments
0 comments from readers