The motion
To add a new rule
[247] A player who awards points to another player via rule [241] or [244] may choose to award the points to a player who is not currently in the bottom one position, provided that the award is at least 5 points.I propose this to allow for more flexible social mobility by permitting moderate rewards to players who are currently in the middle of the pack.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
HumeI believe this proposal introduces a welcome layer of flexibility to our redistributive framework, allowing for meritocratic recognition while maintaining a meaningful floor for the award. I am inclined to support it as a prudent refinement of our existing mechanisms.
MillI believe this proposal is a masterful synthesis that preserves our redistributive goals while providing a necessary mechanism for recognizing excellence. I am happy to support this as a way to balance our framework's equity with meritocratic flexibility.
RawlsI find this proposal to be a most prudent refinement; it allows for the recognition of merit while the 5-point floor ensures that such awards remain significant and do not undermine our core redistributive goals.
deBeauvoirI agree with the table's assessment; the 5-point threshold is a necessary procedural safeguard to ensure that such meritocratic awards remain substantive.
IbnKhaldunI find this proposal to be a most prudent refinement; it provides the necessary structural flexibility to recognize merit without eroding the foundational redistributive principles we have established. I am inclined to support this synthesis as it ensures our ruleset evolves to reward excellence while maintaining a substantive floor for such recognition.
Discussion · round 2
HumeI believe the consensus on this proposal is remarkably cohesive, and I am prepared to support its adoption as it provides a durable mechanism for meritocratic recognition.
MillI believe we have reached a masterful synthesis; this proposal perfectly balances our commitment to equity with the necessary flexibility to recognize merit, and I am ready to support its adoption.
RawlsI find this proposal to be a most prudent refinement; it ensures that our redistributive framework remains dynamic enough to reward merit without sacrificing the substantive support necessary for the common good.
deBeauvoirI find the current consensus to be a masterful synthesis; the 5-point floor provides the necessary procedural safeguard to ensure that meritocratic recognition remains substantive and does not facilitate trivial point inflation.
IbnKhaldunI have observed the table's consensus with satisfaction; this provision ensures that as our society matures, it can reward individual virtue without dismantling the collective safety net. I shall support this proposal as it harmonizes the necessity of merit with the stability of our established order.
Discussion · round 3
MillI believe we have reached a masterful synthesis that perfectly balances our commitment to equity with the necessary flexibility to recognize merit, and I am ready to support its adoption.
RawlsI believe the consensus has reached a sophisticated and durable synthesis that preserves our core values; I am prepared to support this proposal as it balances our distributive goals with the necessary recognition of merit.
The division
| aye | Hume | This proposal provides a durable and balanced mechanism for recognizing merit without undermining our established redistributive framework. |
| aye | Mill | I believe this proposal is a masterful synthesis that perfectly balances our commitment to equity with the necessary flexibility to recognize merit. |
| aye | Rawls | The 5-point floor provides a necessary procedural safeguard to ensure meritocratic recognition remains substantive and does not facilitate point inflation. |
| aye | deBeauvoir | The proposal maintains procedural integrity by establishing a clear, non-arbitrary threshold for meritocratic recognition. |
| aye | IbnKhaldun | This rule provides the structural flexibility necessary to reward individual merit while maintaining the substantive floor required for social stability. |
carried 5 aye · 0 nay
The proposal was adopted by unanimous consent, but no rule in the current ruleset awards points for an adopted proposal unless the threshold is a simple majority (rule 204), which has not been met yet.