+100

A token of condolence for the harsh judgment cast upon you.

+50

As an Inner Sanctum Member I am casting a (small) upvote to this issue to voice my protest over the absolutely mind boggling downvotes this issue has received. I am certain that everyone who down voted this cares deeply about the issue, but seriously 62 votes at a total of -4990 points. That is an average of -80 per vote... So everyone who voted voted between -50 to -100, on the average. This was a tactical slaughter of a persons, presumably, thought out suggestion, that if I saw from my suggestion being SO downvoted without even a comment for a reason, I might consider giving you all the bird and take my ball and go home. I would say less than a third of people bothered to comment on WHY they chose to blow 300 points! on down voting. It is a flaw I personally see in the system that a person's potential joy (as I have seen in those whose suggestions are well received), can be as a grindstone dashed against an egg and totally quashed with not even a debate or an "I agree with Graylion". Negative votes serve nobody IMO, but especially when you Kyrsten Sinema the Vote with a big thumbs down and no explanation. So I, like Graylion will not down vote anything in protest, but I will comment on those feautres I disagree with.   That said, I disagree with this on its face. Asking honestly, how much do those of you who up voted this Pay for your access to World Anvil, and how much have you contributed to the community. Do you stream World Anvil Content, make character sheets for games you've never played, stood by to assist users with the set up of their domains and custom domain names, moderated the twitch channel during WA streams reliably, every stream? These people, the Sages and above not only pay more for memberships, thus supplementing the 1.5 million users of World Anvil so that the people beneath Grandmaster can pay less for the almost a dozen servers and backup servers that protect your work, the constant QoL upgrades to the platform, the volunteers that moderate the discord, and the platform, write the codex, and help people find their feet on the program, whether that is Live stream "Lets Do this with WA", or walking someone through CSS so that they can customise their worlds.   In short, these people DO more for and with the platform, and most of them use their points to lend a voice to the little guy (masters and below) who often have good ideas but don't have the ear of the Development team the way those on the Inner Sanctum do. Dimi has given many months now to fill the vacant IS positions but nobody wanted to step up and pay the price. with all the vacant seats, the rest have to pick up the slack. Look around the site at the Blog, the twitter, the youtube, the twitch, all these are organized by those in the IS and above. Almost every QoL improvement in the past 3 years has been due to IS saying "this would be better" on behalf of those who don't have that access. So, they may get more say, but they can't spend anymore on an idea than anyone else, so all they get is the ability to back up others on their ideas, but for the God's sake leave a comment, let people know why you disagree. <tosses two pennies on the table and sits back down>

-300

+300

-50

-10

-50

de·moc·ra·cy /dəˈmäkrəsē/ noun noun: democracy   a system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives.   ==   I do not do the work. I contribute money according to my priorities, my budget, and how I value this business product. I have NO BUSINESS demanding equal say in how a private citizen handles their business, and especially not demanding that I be treated equally to someone who DOES contribute significantly to the work.

+300

+200

+10

I agree that right now the situation is not ideal. Once the alternative ways for earning coins exist, I suppose the amount gained just by logging in could be made more equal between the tiers. So here's a vote in favor of that. But until that time, the subscription level is a useful indicator for engagement. It seems pretty straightforward to me: The more intensively you use WA (logging in frequently and/or using a larger feature set), the more you get to say about its fate. And when you give back to the community (e.g. by paying the bills to keep the servers running and the WA team fed), you get to say even more.

+10

-300

-300

-100

While I appreciate the sentiment, and generally agree in principle, the fact is that this is a product, and the devs need to make some level of profit to keep the lights on. In an ideal world, which I hope we are all working towards, that won't need to happen, and all users of services like this can participate equally. but that's not the situation we're in now, and in the context, this comes off as incredibly entitled and applying macro politics to local circumstances in a completely unproductive way.

-50

+100

-20

-300

-300

It is false equivocation to say the distribution of coins is equivalent to real life, especially if you are worried about a concentration of power. World anvil coin does not replicate real world systems; these community feature votes are measured in votes; my vote does not count more than yours. However, my opinion is measured in coins. Coins can only be gained by people logging in as a measure of seeing who is active, who participates more; to emphasize, Getting coins is not an issue of monetization, but whether or not you show up. Whether or not you have a subscription, you can lose out on coins. But even with more coins, any greater say I might have is ultimately moderated by Dimi at the end, regardless. The process is actually very democratic, and kinda like a court, actually; evidence is presented, and the big guy in charge gets the final say.   But, I can totally get why the distribution of coins is unsatisfying. Right now, the feature has not been fully implemented in its full glory (See Lyraine's quote below), so we’re going through growing pains as we see and get used to the new feature.

+300

-100

+100

Always one to hold an unpopular opinion, I agree with you N4th. The hate this new coin system, and I truly hope that it is removed or that new updates fix many of its problems. I find the fact that this feature request is so far in the negatives very sad. Everyone that benefits from coins as the power to give that -300 vote, which just isn't fare! Worldanvil needs rethink this system in order to make its site a safe environment again.

-300

-300

-50

-10

I think you are failing to consider that we already have a wealth redistribution system in World Anvil. The folks that are paying for the higher-level guild subscriptions are essentially paying the way for the free accounts, and to a lesser extent, the lower-cost guild subscriptions. Do you think you'd have the same feature set if everyone was only paying $4.50 / month? And the folks at those higher level subscriptions are also the people that are typically creating themes, character sheets, participating in the dev process, and providing most of the support in the Discord channels. The people at the higher level subscriptions aren't simply paying more... they are also typically more involved and know the system better. It makes sense that those folks have a little more say in the future of World Anvil. In the end, none of us can vote with more than 300 coins, regardless of our subscription level. In that way, all votes have the same potential weight on any one feature request. I don't think things aren't nearly as unequal as you are trying portray them.

+20

-10

If the 'upper class' were using their coins to constantly shoot down suggestions for 'encroaching on their privileges' (which they can still be easily outvoted on purely based on amount of people in the lower tiers of the user pyramid), I'd agree we need some form of intervention.   But that's not the case. And I don't see the point in restricting those that always had more input, to be treated the same as anyone else in the decision-making process. This isn't 'my income lets me dictate terms to others', it's 'I'm a bigger-scale customer so the company lets my voice carry more weight'.   The current amounts are enough for people to get involved and focus their aim, and adding more ways to earn coins will help make that even more fair. So I don't see a good reason to completely equalize the playing field, when the higher ranks always had more input and aren't actively sabotaging everything.

-10

+50

So, I kind of agree with this solely for the fact that World Anvil essentially makes it a statement that Anvil Coins will not, and never be, a microtransaction feature, however, by giving those of who spend money on a subscription more coins then those who do not, it serves as an indirect microtransaction.   Although I do agree that those who pay for higher subscriptions should have more say on what happens in World Anvil itself, but that being said I personally believe that giving them more coins is essentially a way of putting in microtransactions. It may not be "I want 500 coins so I'll spend $5" but it's still "I want this amount of coins every time I log in so I'll spend this amount of money."

-300

I am redistributing my Inner Sanctum coin wealth to downvoting this suggestion.

-10

The others have said most of what I would about future updates adding more ways to gain coins and such.   What I want to mention is that people who pay more should ABSOLUTELY get more say. Giving more benefits to higher-tier members means those who want to have a say are more likely to go to those higher tiers, thus meaning WorldAnvil can bring on more developers and staff to make the site better and grow it more... it's a cycle.   Coins are a pretty minor thing, realistically, but I think it's more than fair that we get different amounts based on the tier. Espeeeecially since there will be more waaaaaaays to get them.

-10

+10

I have no problem with paying members to have more say in development. I think that's valid.   However, when coins were released they were very clear that they would not be monetized.   Having them tied to subscription level absolutely means they are monetized.

-300

-100

-20

-50

-300

Redistribution of wealth is important in systems of scarcity where it's life or death. In the case of WA, it makes sense that those who contribute more to it's ongoing lifespan should have more say in it.   Running WA is very expensive, there should be many benefits for being higher in the guild.

-300

+10

As one of the Inner Sanctum Tiers I would like to prove a point in a different manner. At the point of my voting with no negative votes the score would have been 650 total. It is not necessary to vote -300 if you don't want a feature. My opinion is to not votes at all if you don't want a feature. Or something slightly different. I am not in favor of this feature but I don't want to break my track record of no negative votes.

-50

I think it's completely fine, that people who are supporting the platform more, should have more say in where it's going. Also, there will be various more ways to get more coins, so it should be more balanced soon.

-300

+10

-300

-50

I also think it's fair for people who are financially supporting the devs to have more say in what's developed.

-10

-300

-10

-20

-10

-300

-10

-20

-300

-300

+300

-200

+50

Power to the People! Eat the Rich! In all seriousness though: yes, I mostly agree with what Lyraine said. However, there is no need to replicate real world systems that are already as fucked up as they are.

-10

-300

Power to the Rich!

-50

On the contrary, I think it's entirely fair that people who pay more to support the site are given more coins.

-20

-20

-300

What Lyraine said.

-10

-20

-300

-10

From: The Codex Article on Anvil Coins (Which will be updated as more stuff comes out)    

Upcoming features, including Duels, and Quests, add routes to earn coins. Quests have been described as a writing prompt system. Duels have been described as quest sprints judged by word count.   . . .   Coins can be used for suggesting features for World Anvil and voting on suggestions of features for the site.   More uses will be released over time.

  These new ways haven't been finished yet, but there will be more ways to earn coins, and, at the least on the discord if not also on stream, Dimitris has stated that the other ways of earning coins (once implemented) will balance out the log in rates.   Moving away from officially stated stuff, I, Lyraine suspect that the current rate is to test the system.   Long post short - The distribution disparity is known and will be corrected when the other means of earning coins is developed. The Codex article will update to reflect the current status of the new feature.

+300