Actually, we're working on obviating the need for the one month (or one 
year) limit on carrying a negative balance.  The forthcoming ledger will 
track all debts as fundamentally between pairs of people who trust each 
other.	It's up to them to set their credit limits and decide when to 
bug each other to make good.  The system keeps track of the chains of 
debt, short-circuits the debt cycles, etc.  If we implement this right, 
it will be quite intuitive despite some tricky stuff happening behind 
the scenes.  Stay tuned!

Can't tell you how exciting this is that everyone is so excited about 
using yootles...  Really appreciate it.

Keep the questions coming!


By the way, don't worry about migrating to the new system -- we'll be 
very careful to make sure that all past transactions/balances carry over 
seamlessly.


Dave Morris wrote:
> What if we set the standard for not staying negative too long to 1 year 
> instead of 1 month? That seems like it would take a lot of stress off, 
> and be reasonable given how far apart many of us are. If we don't 
> interact as often, everything shifts up and down more slowly. But after 
> a year, if you've gotten way more airport rides than you've given, maybe 
> you should start worrying about doing more in return- or vice versa (be 
> more selfish Monica! :-))    On a yootles ledger between a husband and 
> wife living together, 1 month seems good. On a ledger with people across 
> the country, 1 year or longer seems better.
> 
> This implies that one should participate in multiple ledgers 
> simultaneously, and adhere to different standards on each.   Of course 
> then over time the value of the yootle might be different on each too. 
> Hmmm.
> 
> On Nov 27, 2006, at 12:02 PM, Monica Stephens wrote:
> 
>> Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems yootles accumulation is leading 
>> essentially to a recession in that particular yootles ledger.  I think 
>> this is just occurring because not enough people are using yootles, 
>> and we don't know enough about when to use them, this uncertainty 
>> leads to an imbalance in yootles spending.  People keep offering to 
>> pay me in yootles (for proofreading, a ride somewhere, a book, 
>> etc...), but then have no idea of how to expropriate my accumulation.  
>> At the same time the "unofficial" tie to the dollar does make 
>> everybody apprehensive about going into debt. Does being -50 yootles 
>> imply that you will need to make up $50 of utility within 30 
>> days? That creates a lot of uneasiness and apprehension of going into 
>> more debt--especially in an unfamiliar currency.  So far this just 
>> seems to be a downward spiral of recession and stagnation.
>>  
>> Does anybody have any suggestions for offsetting this?
>>  
>> -Monica
>>  
>>  
>>  
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>>  
>> On 11/27/06, Dave Morris   wrote: I agree that some 
>> standards are useful. Dollars are the first hint, but
>>> what about things for which dollars are not usually exchanged? I gave a
>>> backrub for 10 yootles once, though I felt like I was getting the good
>>> end of that deal. Airport rides are 40 yootles +/- for time of day.
>>> I'm sure it would stabilize over time over large numbers of
>>> transactions, but looking over the yootles whiteboard there aren't many
>>> transactions, certainly not enough to establish statistical averages
>>> for standard commodities.	 Maybe it would help there be more
>>> transactions if more standards were set? How many others feel nervous
>>> using yootles because they're not sure of the value? Backrubs and
>>> airport rides seem like good standards to start with.   I'd certainly
>>> pay 10 yootles for a backrub right now- I think I strained something
>>> yesterday. :-)
>>>
>>> One thing you'll note looking through past transactions- the 1 month
>>> get out of negative deadline is in practice arbitrary and easily
>>> avoided- you just get someone to buy/sell yootles with you temporarily
>>> to meet the deadline (probably by transfer between yooniversal and
>>> universal ledgers). That and noone is going to guilt-trip you about
>>> yootles debt if you're only a few yootles down... isn't there a noise
>>> threshold of 10 yootles or something? So if you experiment first with
>>> small transactions, you're fine.   The big problem is probably going
>>>  into yootles debt then moving to another state where you can't really
>>> interact with people who will get you out of debt. :-)
>>>
>>> Alternately- set up your own yootils ledger for just you and the people
>>> you're closest with physically and emotionally, and work with that
>>> first. Then you can more quickly and safely come to agreement about the
>>> value of yootils.
>>>
>>> Dave
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Nov 27, 2006, at 11:01 AM, Clare Dibble wrote:
>>>
>>> > I have what I consider to be an interesting problem. I believe that I
>>> > have 8 yootles. I would be interested in spending those yootles to
>>> > get out the yootility that I put into them. However, I feel reluctant
>>> > to go into yootle debt because I don't really have a concrete
>>> > understanding of the value of yootles. What if I have to take someone
>>> > to the airport at 5 am to make up for a backrub that cost 10 yootles
>>> > because I am negative and about to exceed my time limit? It seems
>>> > that in establishing their value (to you) it is likely that one would
>>> > go through a period of mis-bidding (think about some of the crap you
>>> > bought as a teenager while you were "figuring out the value of a
>>> > dollar"). And since favors can be sort of nebulous and there are
>>> > people's feelings involved, I feel unsure about the side effects of
>>> > this mis-bidding period that I see as inevitable.
>>> >
>>>  > Any suggestions?
>>> >
>>> > Clare
>>> >
>>> > On 11/27/06, Yanni Kouskoulas   wrote: Very
>>> > interesting answers.
>>> >>
>>> >> I accept and understand points made by Michael and Steve and Kevin
>>> >> about how the supply of a currency affects the value of that
>>> >> currency, and can affect inflation. And while I agree that
>>> >> controlling supply is part of what gives a currency value, it seems
>>> >> to me that it is not sufficient; one must also have a demand for the
>>> >> currency for a value to be set.
>>> >>
>>> >> The problem in my mind is not understanding the effect of supply, it
>>>  >> is understanding where demand comes from, and what puts the demand
>>> >> curve for a currency for an individual in one place as opposed to
>>> >> another place. Clearly demand for yootles is determined by their
>>> >> utility; but what determines the utility of a yootle to an
>>> >> individual?
>>> >>
>>> >> Kevins answer addresses some of this. His argument that demand is set
>>> >> by peoples expectations; they expect it to be worth something, and so
>>> >> it is. But it begs the question of how their expectations get set,
>>> >> and how everyones expectations are synchronized to be the same. If I
>>> >> have one expectation for the value of a yootle, and you have another,
>>> >> the currency system will break down because one of us will be
>>> >> surprised at what we can or cannot buy. Kevin's summation is somewhat
>>> >> convincing to me:
>>> >>
>>> >> > As far as fundamental value goes, I think a yootle needs to be tied
>>> >> > to something else of value to have any real value in itself, at
>>> >> > least until people become accustomed to the system
>>> >>
>>> >> I agree that it seems that a yootle must be tied to something at some
>>> >> point, to set the expectations of its utility. I could accept that a
>>> >> currency could be "not tied" to anything if people have a general
>>> >> expectation of how much that currency is worth. But the expectation
>>> >> must be set in the beginning, somehow, and synchronized and
>>> >> maintained. Once it is untied, I am unsure how synchronization of
>>> >> peoples expectations of the utility of a yootle is maintained.
>>> >>
>>> >> As a point of curiosity/interest, I was taught that the dollar is
>>> >> 'tied' to something of value even today and that something is banking
>>> >> transaction services.
>>> >>
>>>  >> As it was explained to me: One of the Feds functions is clearing
>>> >> checks between large banks. This service indirectly backs your
>>> >> ability to write checks on your checking account, because small banks
>>> >> use larger banks to transfer funds, and largest banks use the fed. So
>>> >> it is a useful service.
>>> >>
>>> >> The Fed clears a finite number of checks a day which correspond to
>>> >> some amount of currency transfers and some amount of labor. You can
>>> >> get the Fed to do this by paying them dollars.
>>> >>
>>> >> This labor backs the value of the dollars in circulation, because the
>>> >> fed guarantees that you can always exchange dollars for banking
>>> >> transaction (check clearing) services. Conceptually, if you give the
>>> >> Fed a few pennies, they will clear your check for you. That is a
>>> >> guaranteed exchange, and that is how dollars are tied to or backed by
>>> >> banking transaction services.
>>> >>
>>> >> So it used to be that the Fed guaranteed an exchange of
>>> >> dollars	 gold
>>> >> and now it guarantees an exchange of
>>> >> dollars	 banking transaction services
>>> >>
>>> >>	There is nothing special about banking transaction services; they
>>> >> are just the service that the Fed guarantees you can buy with your
>>> >> dollars. There is something special about the Fed, since it issues
>>> >> those dollars and this is what creates the "tie."
>>> >>
>>> >> That was the source of my resistance to a tie-less currency, because
>>> >> that is how I thought peoples expectations about the amount of value
>>> >> a particular currency holds were set and maintained and synchronized.
>>> >>
>>> >>	Mabye, as Kevin suggests, once the expectations are set, they remain
>>> >> synchronized without necessarily having a tie.
>>> >>
>>> >> So mabye I can summarize my remaining questions thus:
>>> >>
>>> >> A: If we have tied yootles to something of value, how do we prevent
>>> >> someone who has an abundance of this resource from getting their way
>>> >> every time? Is it necessary to prevent someone from doing this to
>>> >> have a fair system?
>>> >>
>>> >> B: If we have not tied yootles to something of value, how do
>>> >> expectations of the utility of a yootle get set, synchronized and
>>> >> maintained for individuals (specifically referring to the demand side
>>> >> of the yootle-value equation)?
>>> >>
>>> >> It is entirely possible that the answer is B and someone can point me
>>>  >> to a theory or paper that describes this mechanism..
>>> >>
>>> >> -Yanni
>>> >>
>>> David P. Morris, PhD
>>> Operations Manager and Senior Engineer
>>> ElectroDynamic Applications, Inc.
>>>  morris Æ edapplications.com, (734)786-1434, fax: (734)786-3235
>>>
>>>
> David P. Morris, PhD
> Operations Manager and Senior Engineer
> ElectroDynamic Applications, Inc.
> morris Æ edapplications.com, (734) 786-1434, fax: (734) 786-3235
> 
> 
> 
> 

-- 
http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/dreeves  - -  search://"Daniel Reeves"