This is interesting, because I'm also making a distinction here.
"Hoarding" is what I think of as the unintented drive toward keeping
points around in case they're *needed* for a later reward. This is a
preference to spend dollars rather than points whenever possible
(spending dollars in preference to points on any carrot-marked items).
The extreme case of this is spending the minimum of one point on
Rabbit-only items and spending dollars on everything else. I see this
as being quite different than eschewing a lesser reward in order to
save, or bank, points to be able to receive a larger reward later. The
latter is a positive, and intended, outcome of the system.
I'd suggest that the two-point variant system with variable "karma"
costs for rewards removes the incentive to "hoard" (no incentive to
hoard points, no ability to hoard "karma") and increases the incentive
to "bank" "karma" (you can get the small reward now or bank the "karma"
to spend on the bigger reward later).
But, by your own definition of hoarding, I'd have to hoard Karma in case
they're needed for a bigger reward later, since I now have to spend _more_
for bigger items. The current system requires 1 point, no matter the size,
to be able to get the reward (whether through points alone or points and
I still don't why you think this solves what you perceive as a flaw.
So this isn't "me vs Marc", I encourage anyone who sees what I'm missing to
please speak up.
Invite your Hotmail contacts to join your friends list with Windows Live