Sign In

### Topic

#### Property Tax for Housing

I really hope / look forward to the new housing requiring property tax / upkeep fees. I'm thinking it would go up depending on the size of your lot and how big / fancy your house is. Or maybe having to pay for utilities or something. It'll help keep people who are woefully negligent from perpetually owning a house into infinity, and it'll open up housing plots for those who are actively invested in playing the game. We shall see :-)

Posted 12 months ago by ✦ SHI∇IΔΠ ✦ | Permalink

### Replies

Previous 1 2 Next

- It might not be necessary, even for people who have made the argument you have regarding opening up housing; it depends entirely on how TS designs housing.
  There's nothing saying that there needs ever be a "shortage" of housing or even the concept of an "open housing plot." If TS designs housing like private islands with navigation to housing that isn't based on real streets and the ability to choose one's neighbors*, there won't be any such thing, and if that were the case, even people who want active neighbors shouldn't be concerned with inactive players owning homes.
  *There are dozens of ways that they could be designing housing to eliminate this problem, this is just one of them.
  Posted 12 months ago by Knitomaton | Permalink
- Sounds like RL so not for me. Thanks. Besides I can't always log on, to pay 'rent'
  Posted 12 months ago by Phochai | Permalink
- Knitomaton: I love that idea! I would love to have a street with sign posts on either end that have names of various friends on them, I could click on their name and it would jump me to their house's individual street. If they also friended me, there would be a signpost to my house on their street.
  That'd rock!
  Posted 12 months ago by ✦ SHI∇IΔΠ ✦ | Permalink
- -1: It was a bad idea last month. Still a bad idea.
  Of course if YOU want to pay maintenance fees, by all means.
  Just don't rope the rest of us into this seriously un-fun notion.
  Posted 12 months ago by CrashTestPilot | Permalink
- I totally agree with Phochai. It's a fantasy game in a fantasy world in the brains of giants. Why should we have property taxes? It would be a huge turn off for me since it's getting into major real-human-life territory. I think any kind of recurring fees and taxes would conflict with the Glitch world!
  Plus, there are many other ways to eliminate houses owned by absent glitches or to make home ownership more of a big deal. Taxes would sorta ruin the game for me.
  Posted 12 months ago by Pengwen | Permalink
- While I'm clearly for this idea (given my frequent various attempts to suggest it from different ways) at least (if nothing else) people will really have really, really, really voiced their opinion against anything that ever takes away housing ever.
  Posted 12 months ago by ✦ SHI∇IΔΠ ✦ | Permalink
- Shi-upside-down triangle person, this -IMO- boils down to one thing,you want to find a way to get rid of what you call 'inactive players',this topic has been discussed in several other threads ~ad nauseam. TS,no doubt, will deal with inactive players on its own terms. Why do you insist on flogging a dead horse?
  For what it's worth: Many of us already are paying monthly dues ~in the form of tin,copper,moly memberships.
  Posted 12 months ago by ~Scilly~ | Permalink
- Yet another "we insist on deleting your house if you don't play as frequently as we think you should, since TS can't possibly know what they are doing when they allow another style of play" threads.
  Are you worried about the amount of electricity TS has to pay for with all this "excessive" housing? Are you worried that people with real-life issues will ruin your gaming experience? Are you envious of people who have a house that you want?
  Usually the arguments boil down to the last one, more succinctly phrased as "I want your house, get out of my way, because I'm a more important player than you are".
  Please, before you start this kind of discussion, do everyone a favor and check back just a few days for the last thread like this. Then read the one from last month, and then the one from last year.
  And then describe, in business terms, why TS is making the wrong decision to let "inactive" players keep their housing?
  Posted 12 months ago by WindBorn | Permalink
- open up housing plots for those who are actively invested in playing the game.
  Ah, that's what makes you a more important player than me.
  Yep, "I want your housing plot, and I'm a better (actively invested) player than you are so I deserve it".
  Tired old argument.
  Posted 12 months ago by WindBorn | Permalink
- ScillyGirl5: your subscription is not required for a house. Your argument is invalid.
  WindBorn: I'm not insisting, just suggesting an idea. Everyone can, it's easy, here's the link: http://www.glitch.com/forum/general/newtopic.
  Posted 12 months ago by ✦ SHI∇IΔΠ ✦ | Permalink
- Perhaps you would be better off putting suggestions for improvements in the Ideas forum, which is the place TS has designated for such things.
  The sense of entitlement and privilege that you display is awesome.
  Posted 12 months ago by WindBorn | Permalink
- I do not want to see property taxes or anything you have to pay regularly. I think paying outright for and investing time in upgrades/improvements is enough, since it is a game. Not just any game, but Glitch... a game very much unlike the real world and based in the dreams of giants. Wouldn't a dream about paying rent be a nightmare?
  I've had the impression that the new housing will be something that may make any concerns about people owning a house for infinity moot, and I sincerely hope it does, so that people will not be so divided and nasty over the issue anymore.
  Posted 12 months ago by Little Miss Giggles | Permalink
- In the spirit of this conversation, how about we make players who are not subscribed (and have those awful non-subscriber outfits) pay....a subscription? Oh, right.
  Because the game is supposed to be free to all.
  Even you.
  Posted 12 months ago by CrashTestPilot | Permalink
- Windborn wrote: "Perhaps you would be better off putting suggestions for improvements in the Ideas forum, which is the place TS has designated for such things."
  Good idea.
  TS, please transfer this to the IDEAS forum, sorry I placed it here... it kinda straddles the line between idea and general, but I'm cool with it being moved to please people.
  --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
  Windborn wrote: "The sense of entitlement and privilege that you display is awesome."
  How is suggesting an idea a sense of entitlement and privilege? Please stop making personal attacks towards others (including me) it's against the guidelines.
  Posted 12 months ago by ✦ SHI∇IΔΠ ✦ | Permalink
- I'm so happy I live in the bogs. Those who live there know why :) Shhh, don't tell!
  Posted 12 months ago by N2ZOrtolanaBlue | Permalink
- Bruja: ooh, why?! Now I want to know! :-)
  Posted 12 months ago by ✦ SHI∇IΔΠ ✦ | Permalink
- It is disheartening to see how quickly people resort to snide commentary toward a player that makes a suggestion they don't like. I've moderated forums that get nastier than this one, but still, I expect more from this one, though I'm not sure why.
  Even if the suggestion is old and has been debated many times, people have a few polite choices:
  1. Ignore the suggestion.
  2. Provide links to their old input.
  3. Restate their input afresh without the snide commentary.
  It is not difficult to type, "I still do not like this idea, because taxes are stupid and people should have houses forever." to ensure that TS will see your input (again) and go on your merry way. There is absolutely no reason to go off saying, "I don't like this idea because you're a selfish jerk and this topic is old."
  Debate the suggestion, not the character of the player making the suggestion (or any people that may support the suggestion). :(
  Posted 12 months ago by Little Miss Giggles | Permalink
- Bah I hate these 'we should take away the houses people saved up currants for!' threads!.
  I've played games with upkeep taxes like you say (LOTRO to be specific) and to be honest its nothing but a nuisance. Thats a different case since I barely play that game except for the sake of sitting in town and playing music. I like having my little house next to a few friends there though, its just that I don't play enough to always pay the imaginary rent. X] I imagine it might be the same for some players in Glitch, they might only log in a couple minutes today, so what seems like a minimal amount of currants for upkeep to you or me might be a lot to them.
  To be quite frank, the house I have now was the house I wanted, in the location I wanted. If I decide to take a two month break and people want my house, well thats tough. The whole active neighbor thing is bs too, I know my neighbors are active, we just have different playtimes so that means I don't see them much. I don't mind that either. :p
  Posted 12 months ago by Tanit | Permalink
- @Little Miss Giggles: I totally agree, i came into glitch thinking the community was pretty good compared to most games out there. So far i've found mostly friendly people, but the minute it interacts with their "fun" they get all pissy about it. I can understand that inactive ppl do take up housing, and like a few people, i'd rather have neighbors who are friendly, like to meet and hang out or whatever, but that doesn't mean its a bad idea to have some sort of upkeep on housing.
  Posted 12 months ago by BloodravenD | Permalink
- I've made this suggestion many times and I think the action and criteria are both simple and defensible. Someone who has not authenticated against the website - neither logged into the website or entered the world - in an entire calendar year should have their house confiscated and returned to the housing pool.
  Posted 12 months ago by WalruZ | Permalink
- Except the game has only been out a few months WalruZ....so thats a non-issue so far. :P Maybe we should worry about things like this a year from now? Oh wait we'll have new housing by then. ;)
  Posted 12 months ago by Tanit | Permalink
- I think you'll soon find that we're debating "old scripture" here. The new Books of the Giants will be inscribed with a completely different real estate arrangement…
  …which you can then carry on debating about just as vociferously, if you like!
  Posted 12 months ago by Fluxan | Permalink
- "should"
  On what basis? No one else's enjoyment of the game is affected when I don't log in for a week,or a month, or a year.
  What gives any other player the right to intervene in my business relationship with TS? It is really no one else's business how frequently I log in and what I do (or don't do) while logged in. It boggles the mind that a few players continually put forth threads and arguments that essentially say "we know better than TS how you are supposed to interact with them. Since TS isn't treating you the way we think you should be treated, we're going to make multiple threads over multiple days/weeks/months just to make sure you know we're watching how you play and feel like you should be punished when you don't play the way we want you to."
  PS, there should be no need for me to provide links to the multiple threads that someone has started, if they can't track their own forum contributions using the tools TS has provided.
  Posted 12 months ago by WindBorn | Permalink
- Fluxan - Yeah, I think that Camp A's points will be addressed with the new housing system. Camp B can continue to be baffled as to why Camp A made those suggestions in the first place, and anyone left arguing afterwards will be the trolls.
  Posted 12 months ago by Knitomaton | Permalink
- oh, good. i was worried there wasn't going to be another how-can-we-take-people's-houses-from-them thread.
  *checking*
  yep, still against it.
  *checking*
  getting more and more against it every time i see a NEW dodge meant to have the same end result.
  Posted 12 months ago by flask | Permalink
- I'm sincerely baffled at how this idea keeps being brought up. How in the wURld is it possible that any player's experience is hindered in such a way by these so-called "inactive players" that it needs to be addressed over and over and over? I'm honestly curious now. Why is it so important to you?
  Besides, it's already been thoroughly discussed. Tiny Speck has read all of the discussions and the decision will be theirs to make and they will make it when they see fit. Until that time, all we're doing is repeating the same things. Please, make it stop. D:
  Posted 12 months ago by Flowerry Pott | Permalink
- Actually I'm even more in favor of requiring regular upkeep on a home (painting, roofing, dry-rot repair) or having it fall to ruins. THAT would be neat. 'Ruins' would be a big stack of planks, bricks and whatever used to be inside the house, all on the street in a big pile. Party!!
  Posted 12 months ago by WalruZ | Permalink
- I will say the same thing to the advocates of this that I would to the Warren Buffets in the real world who think their taxes are too low, if I had a face-to-face encounter: you're free to write a check to the treasury for whatever extra amount you feel you should pay.
  So toss that extra stuff in a shrine if you want to pay more taxes. And try to stop seeing taxes as a way to control people. There are no public schools to fund in Ur and no fire or police salaries to pay. Theres no reason for a tax. Don't tread on us.
  Posted 12 months ago by Parrow Gnolle | Permalink
- Besides, it's already been thoroughly discussed.
  That is not up to you. If you don't agree, then disagree, but don't tell other players what they can and can't discuss.
  Posted 12 months ago by WalruZ | Permalink
- It's fine if you want taxes, but if we were to do a majority vote most would probably not want taxes.
  No one likes taxes in real life, so why would we want to experience that in game too. And as Parrow says the taxes won't be going anywhere so theres no point in it.
  I already paid for my house, I don't want to have to pay regularly just to keep it. If you really want some sort of upkeep payment, then have them implement apartments that require rent. But for regular housing leave us out of it.
  Posted 12 months ago by Vinchon | Permalink
- Windborn:
  If that PS was at my suggestion about providing links, let me clarify: I meant that people can link to their own responses in previous threads on an issue if they do not wish to rewrite their thoughts in a new response.
  Posted 12 months ago by Little Miss Giggles | Permalink
- I'd rather not have a game I enjoy start taking on real life aspects that are stress-inducing. Sure, currants are relatively easy to acquire, but then the game will start to feel like work in order to maintain the amount needed to pay the tax. No, thank you.
  And to the people who constantly suggest a set time period before housing is removed or accounts deleted - please no. Sometimes people need a break to enjoy the game again or sometimes they get caught up in real life. I have a neopets accounts that, at one point, I didn't log into for 5+ years. But you know what? One day I remembered and logged in and because everything was still there, I started playing again. If everything was gone, I would have just moved on.
  Besides, TS knows how much data they can handle and if it ever becomes a problem, they will create their own solution.
  I just don't understand this need to kick people out of their homes just so you (general you) can snatch it up. Especially now with new housing on the way that no one really knows anything about.
  Posted 12 months ago by Myuki | Permalink
- Yeah, hells no. I spent a lot of currants during the rook attacks and the street projects, something that left me with no money. I would have punched a piglet had I found out that participating in limited content and spending money would result in my losing my Icons, emblems, and other stuff. Same with being low on money and having to go away for a week.
  Posted 12 months ago by Rodger | Permalink
- I absolutely despise this idea, and really hope something like this is not in the works.
  Posted 12 months ago by ♪♥~ Auren ~♥♪ | Permalink
- I do not want anything in this game that requires me to log in on a regular basis. I am disabled, and sometimes I can't log in for a week at a time. I've managed to keep my piggies alive, but if I had to, I could give them up for adoption and nothing would be the worse for the wear. I'd hate to be out of game for a month, then come back to no house and have to re-do everything, just because somebody thought property tax was a cool idea to get me out of my house because I wasn't "active enough" to suit some arbitrary meter.
  I don't want another Farmville.
  Posted 12 months ago by Kaessa | Permalink
- You come up with the most obnoxious housing suggestions. Houses rooked, property taxes... Why do you want to make it hard on sporadic players who actually have lives outside of Glitch?
  Posted 12 months ago by Lucille Ball | Permalink
- Definitely against the idea of a housing tax. Heck, sometimes I just screw around the world petting pigs and playing with my cooking tools for entire game days--I wouldn't be able to do that if I had to worry about making money for taxes.
  Posted 12 months ago by Shiromisa Kaya | Permalink
- That is not up to you. If you don't agree, then disagree, but don't tell other players what they can and can't discuss.
  Clarification: that's not what i meant nor does that resemble what I actually did say. I meant that I'm pretty sure there are no new arguments to present, since they've all been presented already, multiple times. We're just talking in circles continually and making no progress.
  Posted 12 months ago by Flowerry Pott | Permalink
- I say tax the people who want to pay taxes and leave the rest of us alone.
  Posted 12 months ago by CrashTestPilot | Permalink
- I haven't read all the post so I don't know if this has been thought about. But did you ever think that maybe some people aren't playing right now because they maybe having problems at home, work or somewhere else, and also some people may not want to play all the time, and just play sometimes when they need to relax. I am not in favor of the tax thing either, it's too much like rl.
  Posted 12 months ago by Emerald Fern | Permalink
- Perhaps every IRL month the house requires ONE of the following:
  * currants in comparison to the size (for upkeep) - larger houses cost more, but even the biggest house wouldn't cost very much for upkeep
  * you to manually do upkeep as needed (with skills)
  * if you have a subscription: nothing! house up keep is free & automatic! yay for you!
  If you had to do 'upkeep' with skills, it would be the same skills that were needed to build a house (or expansion) in the first place (upkeep would never be harder than building the house in the first place).
  Any upkeep would be (in my mind) very minimal (less than 5m game-time per month). So no-one who has a subscription ever has an advantage over non-subscriber players.
  If you didn't conduct your upkeep for maybe 2 months in a row, you lose that 'teir' of housing and your house degrades to the one beneath it (perhaps there's only 3 overall tiers of housing: cottage, large house, mansion). Each stage of decay shows signs on the exterior as well, so neighbors can see your house getting really ugly, and slowly turning into a hut, when you don't play for a year. Perhaps they'll encourage you to come back and play! If they have a key, they might come do upkeep! If your neighbors weren't a fan of you in the first place, maybe they'll secretly hope you never come back so that your house eventually falls into ruin and vanishes.
  As with all things, just thoughts. Of course, I'm sure people will respond with personal attacks and insults, rather than merely disagreeing or posting alternatives (note Little Miss Giggles' post above)
  As with Knitomaton's post (which I adored btw) if houses exist on their own 'street' then you might end up 'unliking' your house's street from their house's street if they stop playing and their house falls into decay and ruin (even if it never fully disappears).
  Posted 12 months ago by ✦ SHI∇IΔΠ ✦ | Permalink
- You are the only player repeatedly starting threads that suggest arbitrarily taking away other players' in-game work. To add injury to insult, you start them in General and not in Ideas where they belong to get more attention. I don't like your suggestions and because you continue to advocate taking things from me, I am starting to dislike YOU.
  Edited to add: This makes me sad. You are usually very constructive and have some cool ideas too. I've run across you in-game at a street project and you were kind to the other glitchen there. Please stop making suggestions of taking my stuff in various ways (taxes, disappearing items, house damage etc.) if I get busy and don't play for a few months. :-(
  Posted 12 months ago by Lucille Ball | Permalink
- I have started pretty much the same thread in this forum before, and I support the idea. Housing plots that belong to people who stop playing the game for good (however long that might end up being) SHOULD (imo) be returned to the housing pool at some point. Doing so will result in more compact livelier communities. I support my right and Shiv's right to discuss their concerns in the forums.
  That said, some of these comments make me think it might all become irrelevant. Perhaps you'll be able to get a plot that does not exist in any housing quarter. You then add it to the housing quarter you want to live in, linking it to your friends houses. If a plot isn't linked to by any houses, it effectively ceases to exist in game terms.
  Calm blue ocean. I am at peace. I hear the thoughts of the Giants.
  Posted 12 months ago by WalruZ | Permalink
- Since we have limited information on what new housing is and how it works, I think it's kind of early days to begin debating what should and should not happen.
  Posted 12 months ago by Xev | Permalink
- Lucille Ball: If there is a rule or requirement to not discuss something in the forums as part of the ToS or Guidelines, please let me know... until then I will continue to post as I have been (free from censorship, either self-imposed, or forced upon me by cruel commentary from other users). Each idea I've suggested has actually been different (rook attacks, taxes, etc) so I'm clearly not spamming. Further, I have already suggested this be moved to the IDEAS forum above, I am sorry you chose not to read everything before commenting. If you would like to ignore my posts you could always just... you know... ignore them.
  Xev: I totally agree, suggesting ideas is awesome though! No point getting into heated debates and getting upset / defensive about it (like people are doing) since it's all so just brainstorming. Le' sigh.
  Posted 12 months ago by ✦ SHI∇IΔΠ ✦ | Permalink
- I think the real issue here is people are upset that they can't buy the houses that they want to buy and feel like people who aren't playing have them all.
  It's not like they can't or won't make more houses in the future, folks. Why must you try to suggest things that penalize people who cannot play constantly rather than wait patiently for new housing?
  As my biology teacher was famous for saying, manure happens. Stuff happens and something like a tax that would boot people for nonpayment is a terrible idea, no matter how infrequent it is. Once a month? Say you forgot to play that day, or were like me and your only computer (laptop) was damaged and had to be sent for repairs. Or worse, health issues or a family crisis.
  Bad timing can happen to even the most loyal of players regardless of when any sort of culling event would occur.
  This is a fact that must be realized and is crucial in explaining why things like taxes or inactivity will always and forever be one of the worst ideas. It's also an excuse to be mad about not being able to buy the house you want, lol.
  Posted 12 months ago by Rodger | Permalink
- ✦ SHI∇IΔΠ ✦ has a lovely 50K house in Salatu. This is not an issue of him not getting suitable housing. It's a gameplay issue, where some people like high-maintenance games. Others (like me) despise them.
  I can't help getting upset. I really like Glitch and changes to require maintenance or timed log-ins to keep my house and my stuff would cause me to lose interest in the game. The piggies are bad enough as far as maintenance and it's only a matter of time before I get bored with their upkeep, hogtie them, and sell them off.
  Posted 12 months ago by Lucille Ball | Permalink
- It is just brainstorming, but it's brainstorming based on limited and missing information. Information that we definitively know we are missing, and know we will soon have (once the new housing infrastructure is rolled out).
  I'm not saying you can't or shouldn't, have fun and go nuts, but I am saying that for the people who are SERIOUS BUSINESS in this thread (I normally agree with many of you), it's not worth your energy. This is the same idea that's been floated countless times before. TS got the memo that housing should be addressed - customizations, demand, real estate "space" in game, neighborhoods... all need to be evaluated. They are addressing it as we speak!
  But, until we know what's coming out of that, coming up with ideas for rules and taxation is a lot like talking about how you'd rule when you get elected king of the gnomes.
  It's fun, and it's interesting, but all things considered, everything we "know" about housing to base these rules off of is either incomplete or outdated, (or completely made up).
  It is my fond hope that a lot of the issues raised, (and the need for solutions like this one), will be rendered moot by the talented people of TS.
  Posted 12 months ago by Xev | Permalink
- Trolling, Trolling, Trolling
  Keep those threads a-Trolling
  Geeez OP, couldn't you have waited until the last one was cold before throwing down another of these? Even with a mildly different spin, this is still you trying to punish people who don't play the way you think they should.
  The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over, and expecting a different result. But I suppose that applies to my responses as well.
  Posted 12 months ago by KhaKhonsu | Permalink
- Xev said: "coming up with ideas for rules and taxation is a lot like talking about how you'd rule when you get elected king of the gnomes."
  I agree, it is. It's fanciful, it's based a lot on data we just don't have, and it's mere brainstorming. Fun, simple, and care free.
  Posted 12 months ago by ✦ SHI∇IΔΠ ✦ | Permalink

Previous 1 2 Next