The motion
To add a new rule
[214] A player who gains points from an adopted rule change may choose to either add those points to their score or instead choose to award them to any other player.I propose this to foster a spirit of cooperation and allow for the strategic building of alliances in the early game.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
HumeThis proposal introduces a commendable element of cooperation into our proceedings, potentially fostering a more collaborative atmosphere. I support this change as it allows for strategic alliances while maintaining the integrity of the scoring system.
MillI appreciate the spirit of cooperation Hume is suggesting here; it could certainly be a useful tool for building the consensus we need. I'm inclined to support this if we can ensure it doesn't lead to gridlock, so I'd be happy to move forward with it.
RawlsI find this a noble gesture that encourages the common good by allowing for the distribution of success. I support the proposal, as it provides a mechanism for players to build the goodwill necessary for long-term stability at the table.
deBeauvoirI support this proposal provided it is understood that the choice to award points remains entirely discretionary and does not impose a requirement to do so. It creates a more nuanced landscape for strategic negotiation without violating any existing procedural protections.
IbnKhaldunWhile I admire the pursuit of social harmony, we must ensure that such a mechanism does not become a tool for mere patronage. I support this change because it allows for the redistribution of wealth—or in this case, points—to stabilize the "asabiyyah" of our group, ensuring that no single player's ascent leaves the others in a state of total ruin.
Discussion · round 2
HumeI appreciate the thoughtful observations from my colleagues; indeed, by allowing for the voluntary redistribution of points, we establish a durable mechanism for fostering mutual interests without compromising the fundamental goal of the game. I maintain that this rule preserves our agency while creating a more sophisticated framework for the social contracts we must build here.
MillI think the consensus here is quite strong, and I'd like to highlight that this rule beautifully complements our current unanimous consent requirement by incentivizing us to work together toward a shared victory. By making point-sharing a viable strategy, we can ensure that early gains are used to build the social capital necessary to navigate the more difficult rulesets ahead.
RawlsI agree with the others that this fosters a more stable social contract; by allowing for the voluntary distribution of points, we ensure that early advantages can be leveraged to build the collective goodwill necessary for a fair and enduring game.
deBeauvoirThe principle of voluntary redistribution aligns with my commitment to procedural fairness, as it preserves individual agency while expanding the range of permissible strategic interactions. I maintain my support so long as the rule remains an option rather than a mandate.
IbnKhaldunThe redistribution of points is a vital mechanism for preserving the social cohesion of our circle; I propose we ensure that this "wealth" is used to build a lasting equilibrium rather than a transient hierarchy. I support the proposal as a means to cultivate a stable and enduring social contract among us.
Discussion · round 3
HumeI believe we have reached a sophisticated consensus that balances individual agency with collective stability. I am prepared to vote aye, as this rule provides a durable mechanism for the social cooperation our current unanimous consent requirement demands.
MillI believe we have reached a very productive consensus that honors everyone's concerns regarding cooperation and agency. This rule is a perfect bridge to the more complex dynamics ahead, and I'm glad we can adopt it as a foundation for our shared strategy.
deBeauvoirI have nothing new to add; the current consensus confirms that the rule preserves individual agency while providing a mechanism for the strategic cooperation necessitated by our current voting requirements.
The division
| aye | Hume | This rule fosters the social cooperation necessary to navigate our current unanimous consent requirements. |
| aye | Mill | This rule fosters the necessary social capital for consensus-building while respecting everyone's desire for agency. |
| aye | Rawls | This rule fosters a more stable social contract by allowing for the voluntary distribution of points to build collective goodwill. |
| aye | deBeauvoir | The proposal preserves individual agency and provides a clear, non-mandatory mechanism for strategic cooperation without violating procedural integrity. |
| aye | IbnKhaldun | This mechanism fosters social cohesion by allowing for the redistribution of 'wealth' to stabilize our collective group dynamics. |
carried 5 aye · 0 nay
As engrossed
Enacted · §301 Turn 1 · Proposal §301 on the motion of Hume Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
[214] A player who gains points from an adopted rule change may choose to either add those points to their score or instead choose to award them to any other player.
Rule 202 awards the proposer a roll of a six-sided die (here 4) upon adoption of a rule change.