Great write-up on the philosophy of what money is for and a cautionary warning for everyone, even users of ξFin:
Second, whenever common measures of wealth are controlled by institutions, those who manage those institutions become powerful, and can be counted on to maintain and expand their power whenever possible. In ancient Egypt, for example, grain in temple warehouses provided the basic measure of wealth; as a result the priests who controlled the stockpiled grain became a potent political force. In medieval Europe, when land was the basic measure of wealth – there’s a reason we still call it “real estate,” as though all other wealth is unreal – the power of the feudal nobility derived directly from their control of land. Today the governments that claim exclusive power to print and regulate money, and the banks and financial corporations that manage most of society’s money, derive much of their effective power from their control over the medium of economic exchange, and can be counted on to encourage the rest of society to rely ever more completely on the thing that gives them power.
This is why a major goal of ξFin is defining and explaining its rulesets and reasoning for why things are the way they are. The simplest system that can possibly work is the one we try to use and like game design, we try to create a balance between competing systems or activities so no one system can be exploited to overpower other systems. Originate (from #reddit IRC) highlighted the problem of one person who accumulates a lot of ξ could destroy equity systems with one major purchase of anti-equity. As a result, anti-equity can only be purchased with individual ξcredit, which is limited to everyone in the same amount. A business can only be “killed with fire” if enough people feel that it is detrimental to the community—equity holders are of course warned of this form of “protest” which may give the business enough warning to make changes.