Two things:
- work: we want an absolutely fool-proof and un-gamable method and, fortunately, a free market is where “gaming it” is the game, making it a perfect solution to avoid… gaming it?
- simple: if there is a free market, there’s no need for the network (that is, the core software) to care about setting the price
Let’s face it: the human factor is just there. The question is, are we happy with users just leaving if they are unhappy with the current price, probably never to return, or are we willing to give them more choices?
A few things about this:
- what’s wrong with that? (ignoring the fact that IQ is bullshit pseudoscience)
- people would play the network anyway, so turning that into the very mechanism by which it would set the price makes sense (and it has already worked in real life)
- the better the players, the higher the liquidity, and the better the price would approximate the “real price”
It isn’t a loss if you get what you’re asking for. Moreover, different people have different priorities. As I already mentioned, some may want some quick and steady money, some may hold out and wait for the times when scarcity would push up the price higher some more. Both group would leave if they couldn’t achieve their goals only some generalized “ideal” solution somebody clever put together disregarding such thing does not exist.