There are some criticisms to be made regarding trading as a member of the Federal Government. For quite a few years, this has been surprisingly permitted there because there are too few traders in the Federation. The Federal Government is responsible for, among other things, trade regulations, products we can trade, and other matters that help determine the key statistics after three weeks of trading. If, as a member of the Federal Government, you also trade yourself, this constitutes a conflict of interest. No matter how solemnly members promise not to favor anyone, this cannot be verified by traders who do not visit one of the Federal Government members on a daily basis. That is the main reason to argue against members of the Federal Government participating in trading, to any extent whatsoever.
Furthermore, a long-term vision is apparently lacking. As a member of the Federal Government, you do not have to participate in trading simply because there are too few traders, if you were to adjust two levers:
– Attracting more traders to the Federation;
– Or needing fewer traders to keep the economy running.
Attracting more traders is difficult, of course. But needing fewer traders to keep the economy running? That is simple. Either allocate more skills, or reduce the number of products.
There are countless ideas to be conceived. And speaking of which, another piece of long-term vision is missing. We have a beautiful clubhouse full of feedback, input, and the like for the Federation, called Miniconomy Ideas. But very little seems to be done with it. Or at least, not transparently. Clean up such a club, turn it into a backlog, and so on, so that the merchants know what is coming their way in the future.
And now, of course, we still have to address the elephants in the china shop. The silent death of (international) politics, the role-playing aspect of the game, and the definition of a member of the Federal Government.
Let’s start with the latter. The highest authority in the Federation. The persons who monitor the progress of Miniconomy. They are called Game Leaders in the concise laws. The leaders of the game, so not players. The Game Leaders are supported by the CBI, it states. If we then look at the law, something nice is stated. It is prohibited to manage citizens that are intended for or used to serve the advantage of another player. The Federal Government or the CBI can decide on this. It is quite something when the person supposed to lead the game manages a citizen that might be used to provide an advantage to another player.
We do not have a separation of powers in our Federation. It is an authoritarian system that merely pretends to be fair. It is probably not without reason that the game management makes little effort to keep (international) politics or the judiciary functioning. And this, even though Miniconomy is a free browser game where thousands of players trade, work, and manage. Become a trader, agent, mayor, banker, or even president. Join a friendly, active community and determine your virtual life: chase wealth, power, friendship, or politics.
For here, anything is possible. At least, that is what is promoted. But is that still the case? Hasn’t it, by now, become a game where only trade and crime flourish, and where people become real estate owners simply to gain wealth? After all, power or politics are of no use to you. They are simply cast aside by the game management, which makes adjustments but then fails to enforce them, or refers complaints to an element outside this Federation, thereby allowing even less transparency.