RE: Notes on Token Design Philosophy

After reading your post I definitely have new insight and understanding into the merits of a "personal coin". I'm pretty sure this was the underlying intent of the WAVES platform (well that and making money), and how you refer to "release your own greed", as at least one mechanism to successful implementation - I like it.
As an American with somewhat non-typical Marxist "tendencies", the concept on the surface sounds great - but I wonder if some of the same destructive forces that always dismantle genuine social movements, will once again have the same effects here. Your statement that the individual should do;

"what's best for the network instead of what's best for themselves alone"

Is indeed the underlying principal of those ideals. Maybe with the blockchain, we will finally have the egalitarian (ish) society we deserve... (I had to throw that caveat in there for the capitalist - which I also believe in ) ... :) Great post - thanks...

I think with so many networks, there's bound to be some for every flavour where an individual's is better aligned for the "greater good". There's bound to be some destructive forces in the mix, but I guess it's all about generating a net positive as a whole..

Btw, here's an interesting excerpt from The Sovereign Individual in chapter 8 about where society's heading (which seems to be somewhat more egalitarian, but in a different way):-

For no very good reason, most twentieth-century sociologists have assumed that technological progress would naturally tend to produce increasingly egalitarian societies. This was not true prior to about 1750. Beginning around that time, innovative new industrial technology began to open job opportunities for the unskilled and increase the scale of enterprise. The new technology of the factory not only raised the real earnings of the poor without any effort on their part; it also tended to increase the power of political systems, making them more able to redistribute income as well as more capable of withstanding unrest. Taking a longer view, there is no inherent reason to suppose that technology always tends to mask rather than accentuate the differences in human talents and motivation. Some technologies have been relatively egalitarian, requiring contributions of many independent workers of approximately equal utility; others have put power or wealth into the hands of a few masters while most people were little more than serfs. Both history and technology have shaped different nations in different ways. The Factory Age produced one shape, and the Information Age is producing another, less violent, and therefore more elitist and less egalitarian than the one it is replacing.