From the scavenger hunt, it's become clear that neither Maroku nor Tig seem to have a genuinely logical way of determining whether or not an item release is "good" or "bad" for the economy, and just go off of what they "feel". I myself also cannot say for certain whether something is objectively "good" or "bad" for the economy, because it depends on how you define "good" or "bad". I do, however, have a method that I use which I believe is far more developed than any method used by the staff.
My definition of "good" and "bad": Something is good for the economy if it increases the amount of "value" in the economy, something is bad for the economy if it decreases the amount of "value" in the economy.
How I measure how an item release changes the amount of "value" in the economy:
Obviously, this formula requires explanation.
- This is the overall change in value in the economy as a result of the addition of the new item. I (and most people) measure value in diamonds, but we can use platinum, RoWs, or any other item that has value so long as we use it throughout the rest of the equation and the item being used doesn't have its value affected by the item addition.
- This part measures the direct effect of the item addition. That is, the effect on the quantity and value of the item being added. qn is the quantity of the item in the economy after the item addition, and vn is the value of the item after the item addition. qo and vo are the quantity and value of the item before the addition. The addition of a brand new item always has a positive direct effect unless vn = 0.
- This part measures and adds the indirect effect of the item addition. That is, the effect of the item addition on the value of
other items. qi is the quantity of the item in the economy, and delta vi is the change in value of the item as a result of the item addition. The indirect effect can sometimes be considerable. For example the release of Moon Shields is considered to have reduced the value of Dustari Shields a great deal.
Short version: If tripling the amount of an item in the economy results in its value being cut in half and has no affect on other items, it would be good for the economy to have that item's amount trippled. If doubling the amount of an item in the economy results in the value of that item being cut to a third of what it was, it would be bad for the economy to have that item's amount doubled.
There are a number of problems with this method that I should point out:
1. It requires that the item being used to measure "value" not be affected by the item addition. This generally wouldn't be a problem, but could be if we were talking about an item addition that was going to change the value of diamonds.
2. It only looks at the change in value in the economy, not how evenly the economy's total "value" is distributed among the players.
3. It isn't clear how to define whether or not an item is "in the economy". Are all items that exist "in the economy"? Only those on active accounts? Only those people are willing to sell?
4. It would be almost impossible to measure the variables needed to actually use the equation numerically, and it's completely impossible to accurately predict what the variables will be. Therefore it can only be used as a guideline for how to think about item additions.
It should also be noted that this method can be used for any item addition, not just those done by the staff (this is a good thing about it).
Despite the problems with it, I think it would be good if staff were to use this method as a "rule of thumb" when considering item additions. You can see me using this method when I've supported/opposed/questioned changes that would influence the quanitity and value of items. For example, I opposed making Ice Dagger easily craftable because it would destroy its value and therefore decrease the amount of value in the economy regardless of how many Ice Daggers were created (a million times zero is zero), yet I was silent when they were given out on Halloween because I wasn't sure whether the quantity-value balance would work out positively or negatively.
Regarding Maroku's scavenger event, I think it would have increased the total value in the economy and should have been allowed to continue.