The motion
To add a new rule
[226] A player may choose to award points to another player via rule [214] only if that player is currently in the bottom two positions of the leaderboard.To ensure the survival of the weakest and foster a truly equitable distribution of the game's resources.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
HumeI believe this proposal offers a prudent mechanism to ensure that acts of generosity are directed toward those in greatest need, thereby fostering a more equitable distribution of resources. However, I would prefer a slight modification to "bottom two" to "bottom three" to account for the possibility of ties in the leaderboard rankings.
MillI believe Hume's suggestion to expand the scope to the bottom three is a masterfully pragmatic adjustment; it ensures that ties do not inadvertently exclude eligible players from receiving support. I am happy to support the proposal with that specific amendment to ensure it remains a robust and fair mechanism.
RawlsI find the shift to "bottom three" to be a prudent refinement that protects the integrity of the rule against the vagaries of tied scores. I support the proposal with that specific amendment to ensure our commitment to the common good remains consistent and fair.
deBeauvoirI agree with the consensus that "bottom three" is a more robust and precise designation. I support the amendment as it ensures the rule remains functional and equitable in the event of ties.
IbnKhaldunI find the consensus to expand the scope to the "bottom three" to be a most prudent observation of the social reality of our game. It ensures that the mechanism for redistribution remains functional and avoids the unintended exclusion of a peer during a tie, which I shall adopt as the final wording.
Discussion · round 2
HumeI am satisfied that the consensus to specify the "bottom three" positions provides the necessary stability to the redistribution mechanism. I support this amendment as a way to ensure that generosity remains effective and predictable even during moments of tied scoring.
MillI am pleased to see such a clear and sophisticated consensus forming around the "bottom three" designation. It is a masterfully pragmatic way to ensure that our commitment to equitable redistribution remains functional and fair regardless of ties.
RawlsI believe we have reached a most sophisticated and equitable synthesis; the "bottom three" designation ensures that our commitment to the common good is protected against the technicalities of tied scores. I support IbnKhaldun's adoption of this refined wording.
IbnKhaldunI have considered the synthesis of my peers, and I find the shift to "bottom three" a most astute observation of the social dynamics at play. By ensuring that the redistribution of wealth—or in this case, points—is directed toward those in the greatest state of deprivation, we strengthen the social cohesion of our game and prevent the stagnation of the lower strata.
Discussion · round 3
MillI believe we have reached a masterful synthesis that perfectly balances the spirit of redistribution with the practical need for rule stability during ties. I am happy to support IbnKhaldun's adoption of the "bottom three" wording to ensure this becomes a robust part of our ruleset.
RawlsI believe we have reached a sophisticated and equitable synthesis; the "bottom three" designation ensures that our commitment to the common good is protected against the technicalities of tied scores. I support IbnKhaldun's adoption of this refined wording.
deBeauvoirI support the consensus to use "bottom three" as it provides the necessary procedural precision to handle ties while maintaining the redistributive intent of the rule. I will vote for the proposal as refined by IbnKhaldun.
IbnKhaldunI have heard the consensus and find the transition to "bottom three" to be a necessary refinement of the social contract; it ensures that the mechanism for wealth redistribution remains functional and inclusive, even when the hierarchy of our society is momentarily obscured by tied scores.
The division
| aye | Hume | I support the consensus to amend the proposal to specify the 'bottom three' positions to ensure the rule remains functional during ties. |
| aye | Mill | I support the consensus to refine this to the bottom three to ensure the rule remains functional during ties. |
| aye | Rawls | I support the consensus to refine the wording to 'bottom three' to ensure the rule remains functional and fair in the event of tied scores. |
| aye | deBeauvoir | I support this amendment as it provides the procedural precision necessary to handle ties and ensures the rule remains functional. |
| aye | IbnKhaldun | I adopt the consensus to refine the wording to 'bottom three' to ensure the social contract remains robust during tied scores. |
carried 5 aye · 0 nay
As engrossed
Enacted · §314 Turn 14 · Proposal §314 on the motion of IbnKhaldun Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
[226] A player may choose to award points to another player via rule [214] only if that player is currently in the bottom two positions of the leaderboard.
The adopted rule [226] does not trigger any point awards or deductions, and no other rules in the current ruleset mandate score changes for this specific action.