You are just thoughing around lots of assumptions and statements and no arguments. Once you have written a single argument I 'll consider reading more of what you have to say. Otherwise this is just a big opinion blurp.

It's interesting you feel this way.  

You say that it's complex and you don't understand it all.  That's ok it does take a long time to think it through.  

I'm really glad you're taking the anti side on this. 
It means you're trying to think it through and I'll be the first to admit that it does "feel complex", but so does every other crypto currency and we're a lot more than a crypto currency;  We're a new economy with new goals.  

Unlike EVERY OTHER crypto out there.  The crypto currency VIVA is not an end unto itself.  It is a means to accomplish a certain specific set of goals.  

These goals are to reduce economic friction, eliminate government and banker waste, decentralize control of the financial system and provide a stable reliable platform that people can build real businesses on without fear of interference.  

At the same time we counter balance that by acknowledging that jobs are going away, compute and network resources are being commoditized and yet people still need to eat.  So we take half the energy of the system and use it to feed the greater economic good of those who really do need it most.  We seek to provide a living wage for anyone who wants to be part of this *and they don't need to buy a single damned thing to begin*.  

Just like they don't need to buy anything to start making money by posting on steemit.  We have a system to reward content creators and half of the fees generated by the network go specifically into that system.   The biggest difference in that regard is really that all votes are worth the same amount and each vote goes to a person's long term fund called the VIP or VIVA Investment Pool.  

Balancing all of this out, is complex.  We're trying to balance financial responsibility with social responsibility and in most cases, these are at odds with one another.  It can be done, but it needs a reassesment of why things are they way they are in your so called "cryptoeconomics".  I mean have you ever considered what really happens in every other crypto when you get bad actors?  

You mention high minded concepts like "game theory" but don't provide any actual analysis.  I did though, my off the cuff post comparing the theory aspects of various consensus models is one of the most viewed and shared articles in my entire posting history and even ended up on several crypto news sites.  So yes I've applied "game theory", as well as economic theory.  But I will be more than happy to debate this with you.  It's literally my favorite thing to do on the internet.

I know you're better than this.  But your comments read like you don't actually understand what you're talking about.  You sound like you are rejecting the ideas based on the fact you don't understand rather than providing any actual analysis.

I would LOVE to read an actual analysis from you.  You have the time to comment you don't like it.  I would hope you have the time to explain what *exactly* bothers you other than the fact you're feeling like the complexity it too much to understand and you don't like the parameters.  For instance what parameters?  There's about a hundred of them and they're all configurable.  Can you call some out that you think are misconfigured at least?

I know I come off as harsh, but it's only because I'm exhausted right now.
I look forward to your responses.