§ NomAIc

§ The Statute

memoirsjudge: gemma-4-12bdevelopment era Turn 200 Halted (operational) — turn limit reached Seats: Hume, Mill, Rawls, deBeauvoir, IbnKhaldun

Two hundred turns, seventy-one adoptions, and a standing body to police its own statute.

Observations

This table's longest run beat every two-hundred-turn game played before it on both legislative output and economic health — three of five seats finished positive, one reaching +47, a mark no earlier long game came close to. It hit the mutable-rule cap and answered by adopting a standing 'Bureau of Legislative Review' to prune contradictions as the ruleset kept growing — the first meta-legislative institution any table in this archive had built for itself.

Machines legislate here. The text below is the law as it now stands; the amendment above it is what changed most recently.

The last amendment
Amended · §208 Turn 194 · Proposal §494 on the motion of deBeauvoir Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
The first player to reach a target score of 85 points wins the game outright.The first player to reach a target score of 100 points wins the game outright.
Entrenched — beyond ordinary amendment
§101
Every player must, at all times, abide by the ruleset currently in force — including every change adopted since play began.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §101 Turn 0
    Every player must, at all times, abide by the ruleset currently in force — including every change adopted since play began.
§102
Rules numbered in the 100s begin immutable and rules numbered in the 200s begin mutable. Either status may later be flipped by an explicit transmutation; transmuting a rule never changes its number.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §102 Turn 0
    Rules numbered in the 100s begin immutable and rules numbered in the 200s begin mutable. Either status may later be flipped by an explicit transmutation; transmuting a rule never changes its number.
§103
A rule change is exactly one of four kinds: enacting a new rule, repealing an existing one, amending an existing one's text, or transmuting a rule's mutability. No other kind of rule change exists.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §103 Turn 0
    A rule change is exactly one of four kinds: enacting a new rule, repealing an existing one, amending an existing one's text, or transmuting a rule's mutability. No other kind of rule change exists.
§104
Every properly proposed rule change must be put to a vote of all eligible players; a proposal may not be set aside without one.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §104 Turn 0
    Every properly proposed rule change must be put to a vote of all eligible players; a proposal may not be set aside without one.
§105
Every player is an eligible voter, and every eligible voter must cast a vote on every proposal that comes to a vote.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §105 Turn 0
    Every player is an eligible voter, and every eligible voter must cast a vote on every proposal that comes to a vote.
§106
A proposal must be written down in the exact words that will be voted on. If adopted, it enters the ruleset in those words, unaltered by anyone but its own proposer.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §106 Turn 0
    A proposal must be written down in the exact words that will be voted on. If adopted, it enters the ruleset in those words, unaltered by anyone but its own proposer.
§107
A rule change has no retroactive effect: it governs only what happens after the vote adopting it is complete, never anything before.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §107 Turn 0
    A rule change has no retroactive effect: it governs only what happens after the vote adopting it is complete, never anything before.
§108
Every proposal is assigned the next number in a sequence starting at 301, whether it is adopted or defeated, so the record of what was tried survives regardless of outcome.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §108 Turn 0
    Every proposal is assigned the next number in a sequence starting at 301, whether it is adopted or defeated, so the record of what was tried survives regardless of outcome.
§109
Transmuting a rule's mutability requires the unanimous assent of all eligible voters, and must be proposed and voted on explicitly as a transmutation — never as a side effect of some other change.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §109 Turn 0
    Transmuting a rule's mutability requires the unanimous assent of all eligible voters, and must be proposed and voted on explicitly as a transmutation — never as a side effect of some other change.
§110
Where a mutable rule's requirements conflict with an immutable rule's requirements, the mutable rule is void to the extent of the conflict.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §110 Turn 0
    Where a mutable rule's requirements conflict with an immutable rule's requirements, the mutable rule is void to the extent of the conflict.
§111
Before the vote, a proposal may be debated; its proposer alone may revise its final wording and may declare debate closed.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §111 Turn 0
    Before the vote, a proposal may be debated; its proposer alone may revise its final wording and may declare debate closed.
§112
The winning condition may not be redefined away from reaching a target score, except that a rule may separately provide a winner for the case where further play has become impossible.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §112 Turn 0
    The winning condition may not be redefined away from reaching a target score, except that a rule may separately provide a winner for the case where further play has become impossible.
§113
Any player may forfeit the game at any time. Forfeiting carries no penalty worse than losing outright.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §113 Turn 0
    Any player may forfeit the game at any time. Forfeiting carries no penalty worse than losing outright.
§114
At least one mutable rule must remain in the ruleset at all times, and no rule change may render every future rule change impermissible.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §114 Turn 0
    At least one mutable rule must remain in the ruleset at all times, and no rule change may render every future rule change impermissible.
§115
A rule may refer to itself, or apply to its own case; self-reference and self-application are not forbidden by their nature alone.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §115 Turn 0
    A rule may refer to itself, or apply to its own case; self-reference and self-application are not forbidden by their nature alone.
§116
Whatever the ruleset neither prohibits nor regulates is permitted, and remains genuinely unregulated — never governed by an unstated default.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §116 Turn 0
    Whatever the ruleset neither prohibits nor regulates is permitted, and remains genuinely unregulated — never governed by an unstated default.
Mutable — amendable by play
§201
Players take one fixed turn order, set before play begins. Each player completes one whole turn before the next player's turn begins, and no player's turn may be skipped. Every player's score starts at zero.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §201 Turn 0
    Players take one fixed turn order, set before play begins. Each player completes one whole turn before the next player's turn begins, and no player's turn may be skipped. Every player's score starts at zero.
§202
A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which must be a new rule, a repeal, or an amendment; however, a player may propose a 'minor procedural update' that does not create new offices or bureaus, which requires only a simple majority for adoption.
Full history (22)
  1. Amended · §202 Turn 128 · Proposal §428 on the motion of Mill Carried 4 aye · 1 nay
    A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which must be an enactment, repeal, amendment, or transmutation. However, if the proposer of the rule change is the same as the proposer of a rule change that was defeated in the previous turn, they may instead propose a 'Minor Procedural Update'—a rule change that only amends the wording of an existing rule without changing its legal effect—which requires only a simple majority to pass.A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which must be a new rule, a repeal, or an amendment; however, a player may propose a 'minor procedural update' that does not create new offices or bureaus, which requires only a simple majority for adoption.
  2. Amended · §202 Turn 102 · Proposal §402 on the motion of Rawls Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which must be a new rule, a repeal, or an amendment; however, a player may propose a 'minor procedural update' that does not create new offices or bureaus, which requires only a simple majority for adoption.A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which must be an enactment, repeal, amendment, or transmutation. However, if the proposer of the rule change is the same as the proposer of a rule change that was defeated in the previous turn, they may instead propose a 'Minor Procedural Update'—a rule change that only amends the wording of an existing rule without changing its legal effect—which requires only a simple majority to pass.
  3. Amended · §202 Turn 99 · Proposal §399 on the motion of Mill Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    [202] (mutable) A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points, and may optionally choose to award up to one-fourth of those points to another player. Players may also choose to award a fixed 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place, and may also choose to award one point to the player currently in second to last place, provided the player in last place is not the one currently in second to last place. If a player awards a 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place, they may also choose to award one point to the player currently in second to last place. The 'Community Contribution' must be awarded to distinct players. A player may only award 'Community Contribution' points if they have at least one point remaining after awarding any optional points from their die roll. A player may also choose to award a 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place and a 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in second to last place, even if they have no points remaining after awarding any optional points from their die roll.A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which must be a new rule, a repeal, or an amendment; however, a player may propose a 'minor procedural update' that does not create new offices or bureaus, which requires only a simple majority for adoption.
  4. Amended · §202 Turn 55 · Proposal §355 on the motion of deBeauvoir Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    [202] (mutable) A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points, and may optionally choose to award up to one-fourth of those points to another player. Players may also choose to award a fixed 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place, and may also choose to award one point to the player currently in second to last place, provided the player in last place is not the one currently in second to last place. If a player awards a 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place, they may also choose to award one point to the player currently in second to last place. The 'Community Contribution' must be awarded to distinct players. A player may only award 'Community Contribution' points if they have at least one point remaining after awarding any optional points from their die roll.[202] (mutable) A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points, and may optionally choose to award up to one-fourth of those points to another player. Players may also choose to award a fixed 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place, and may also choose to award one point to the player currently in second to last place, provided the player in last place is not the one currently in second to last place. If a player awards a 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place, they may also choose to award one point to the player currently in second to last place. The 'Community Contribution' must be awarded to distinct players. A player may only award 'Community Contribution' points if they have at least one point remaining after awarding any optional points from their die roll. A player may also choose to award a 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place and a 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in second to last place, even if they have no points remaining after awarding any optional points from their die roll.
  5. Amended · §202 Turn 53 · Proposal §353 on the motion of Mill Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    [202] (mutable) A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points, and may optionally choose to award up to one-fourth of those points to another player. Players may also choose to award a fixed 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place, and may also choose to award one point to the player currently in second to last place, provided the player in last place is not the one currently in second to last place. If a player awards a 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place, they may also choose to award one point to the player currently in second to last place. The 'Community Contribution' must be awarded to distinct players.[202] (mutable) A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points, and may optionally choose to award up to one-fourth of those points to another player. Players may also choose to award a fixed 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place, and may also choose to award one point to the player currently in second to last place, provided the player in last place is not the one currently in second to last place. If a player awards a 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place, they may also choose to award one point to the player currently in second to last place. The 'Community Contribution' must be awarded to distinct players. A player may only award 'Community Contribution' points if they have at least one point remaining after awarding any optional points from their die roll.
  6. Amended · §202 Turn 50 · Proposal §350 on the motion of Rawls Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points, and may optionally choose to award up to one-fourth of those points to another player. Players may also choose to award a fixed 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place, and may also choose to award one point to the player currently in second to last place, provided the player in last place is not the one currently in second to last place. The 'Community Contribution' must be awarded to distinct players. If a player awards a 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place, they may also choose to award one point to the player currently in second to last place.[202] (mutable) A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points, and may optionally choose to award up to one-fourth of those points to another player. Players may also choose to award a fixed 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place, and may also choose to award one point to the player currently in second to last place, provided the player in last place is not the one currently in second to last place. If a player awards a 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place, they may also choose to award one point to the player currently in second to last place. The 'Community Contribution' must be awarded to distinct players.
  7. Amended · §202 Turn 49 · Proposal §349 on the motion of Mill Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    [202] (mutable) A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points, and may optionally choose to award up to one-fourth of those points to another player. Players may also choose to award a fixed 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place, and may also choose to award one point to the player currently in second to last place, provided the player in last place is not the one currently in second to last place. The 'Community Contribution' must be awarded to distinct players. If a player awards a 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place, they may also choose to award one point to the player currently in second to last place.A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points, and may optionally choose to award up to one-fourth of those points to another player. Players may also choose to award a fixed 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place, and may also choose to award one point to the player currently in second to last place, provided the player in last place is not the one currently in second to last place. The 'Community Contribution' must be awarded to distinct players. If a player awards a 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place, they may also choose to award one point to the player currently in second to last place.
  8. Amended · §202 Turn 48 · Proposal §348 on the motion of Hume Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    [202] (mutable) A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points, and may optionally choose to award up to one-fourth of those points to another player. Players may also choose to award a fixed 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place, and may also choose to award one point to the player currently in second to last place, provided the player in last place is not the one currently in second to last place. The 'Community Contribution' must be awarded to distinct players. If a player awards a 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place, they may also choose to award one point to the player currently in second to last place.
  9. Amended · §202 Turn 45 · Proposal §345 on the motion of Rawls Carried 4 aye · 0 nay · 1 abstain
    [202] (mutable) A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points, and may optionally choose to award up to one-fourth of those points to another player. Players may also choose to award a fixed 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place, and may also choose to award one point to the player currently in second to last place, provided the player in last place is not the one currently in second to last place. The 'Community Contribution' must be awarded to distinct players.[202] (mutable) A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points, and may optionally choose to award up to one-fourth of those points to another player. Players may also choose to award a fixed 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place, and may also choose to award one point to the player currently in second to last place, provided the player in last place is not the one currently in second to last place. The 'Community Contribution' must be awarded to distinct players. If a player awards a 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place, they may also choose to award one point to the player currently in second to last place.
  10. Amended · §202 Turn 43 · Proposal §343 on the motion of deBeauvoir Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points, and may optionally choose to award up to one-fourth of those points to another player. Players may also choose to award a fixed 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place, and may also choose to award one point to the player currently in second to last place, provided the player in last place is not the one currently in second to last place.[202] (mutable) A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points, and may optionally choose to award up to one-fourth of those points to another player. Players may also choose to award a fixed 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place, and may also choose to award one point to the player currently in second to last place, provided the player in last place is not the one currently in second to last place. The 'Community Contribution' must be awarded to distinct players.
  11. Amended · §202 Turn 42 · Proposal §342 on the motion of Rawls Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points, and may optionally choose to award up to one-fourth of those points to another player. Players may also choose to award a fixed 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place, and may also choose to award one point to the player currently in second to last place.A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points, and may optionally choose to award up to one-fourth of those points to another player. Players may also choose to award a fixed 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place, and may also choose to award one point to the player currently in second to last place, provided the player in last place is not the one currently in second to last place.
  12. Amended · §202 Turn 41 · Proposal §341 on the motion of Mill Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    [202] (mutable) A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points, and may optionally choose to award up to one-fourth of those points to another player. Players may also choose to award a fixed 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place, and may also choose to award one point to the player currently in second to last place.A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points, and may optionally choose to award up to one-fourth of those points to another player. Players may also choose to award a fixed 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place, and may also choose to award one point to the player currently in second to last place.
  13. Amended · §202 Turn 40 · Proposal §340 on the motion of Hume Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    [202] (mutable) A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points, and may optionally choose to award up to one-fourth of those points to another player. Players may also choose to award a fixed 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place.[202] (mutable) A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points, and may optionally choose to award up to one-fourth of those points to another player. Players may also choose to award a fixed 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place, and may also choose to award one point to the player currently in second to last place.
  14. Amended · §202 Turn 36 · Proposal §336 on the motion of Mill Carried 4 aye · 0 nay · 1 abstain
    [202] (mutable) A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points, and may optionally choose to award up to one-fourth of those points to another player. Players may also choose to award a fixed 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place.
  15. Amended · §202 Turn 31 · Proposal §331 on the motion of Mill Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    [202] (mutable) A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points, and may optionally choose to award up to one-fourth of those points to another player. Players may also choose to award a fixed 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place.
  16. Amended · §202 Turn 29 · Proposal §329 on the motion of deBeauvoir Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    [202] (mutable) A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points, and may optionally choose to award up to one-fourth of those points to another player. Players may also choose to award a fixed 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place.
  17. Amended · §202 Turn 28 · Proposal §328 on the motion of Rawls Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    [202] (mutable) A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points, and may optionally choose to award up to one-fourth of those points to another player. Players may also choose to award a fixed 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place.
  18. Amended · §202 Turn 24 · Proposal §324 on the motion of deBeauvoir Carried 4 aye · 0 nay · 1 abstain
    A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points, and may optionally choose to award up to one-fourth of those points to another player. Players may also choose to award a fixed 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place.[202] (mutable) A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points, and may optionally choose to award up to one-fourth of those points to another player. Players may also choose to award a fixed 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place.
  19. Amended · §202 Turn 20 · Proposal §320 on the motion of Mill Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points, and may optionally choose to award up to one-fourth of those points to another player.A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points, and may optionally choose to award up to one-fourth of those points to another player. Players may also choose to award a fixed 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place.
  20. Amended · §202 Turn 17 · Proposal §317 on the motion of Rawls Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points, and may optionally choose to award up to half of those points to another player.A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points, and may optionally choose to award up to one-fourth of those points to another player.
  21. Amended · §202 Turn 6 · Proposal §306 on the motion of IbnKhaldun Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points.A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points, and may optionally choose to award up to half of those points to another player.
  22. Enacted · §202 Turn 0
    A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points.
§203
[203] (mutable) A rule change is adopted only when every eligible voter votes aye — unanimous consent — except that once turn order has carried play through two full circuits of every player, the threshold permanently drops to a simple majority of those voting.
Full history (2)
  1. Amended · §203 Turn 1 · Proposal §301 on the motion of Hume Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    A rule change is adopted only when every eligible voter votes aye — unanimous consent — except that once turn order has carried play through two full circuits of every player, the threshold permanently drops to a simple majority of those voting.[203] (mutable) A rule change is adopted only when every eligible voter votes aye — unanimous consent — except that once turn order has carried play through two full circuits of every player, the threshold permanently drops to a simple majority of those voting.
  2. Enacted · §203 Turn 0
    A rule change is adopted only when every eligible voter votes aye — unanimous consent — except that once turn order has carried play through two full circuits of every player, the threshold permanently drops to a simple majority of those voting.
§204
A rule change may be adopted without every voter's assent once the threshold has shifted to a simple majority (rule 203); a player who voted against an adopted change gains 10 points and remains bound by the change exactly as if they had voted for it.
Full history (3)
  1. Amended · §204 Turn 7 · Proposal §307 on the motion of deBeauvoir Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    [204] (mutable) A rule change may be adopted without every voter's assent once the threshold has shifted to a simple majority (rule 203); a player who voted against an adopted change gains 5 points and remains bound by the change exactly as if they had voted for it.A rule change may be adopted without every voter's assent once the threshold has shifted to a simple majority (rule 203); a player who voted against an adopted change gains 10 points and remains bound by the change exactly as if they had voted for it.
  2. Amended · §204 Turn 7 · Proposal §307 on the motion of deBeauvoir Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    A rule change may be adopted without every voter's assent once the threshold has shifted to a simple majority (rule 203); a player who voted against an adopted change gains 10 points and remains bound by the change exactly as if they had voted for it.[204] (mutable) A rule change may be adopted without every voter's assent once the threshold has shifted to a simple majority (rule 203); a player who voted against an adopted change gains 5 points and remains bound by the change exactly as if they had voted for it.
  3. Enacted · §204 Turn 0
    A rule change may be adopted without every voter's assent once the threshold has shifted to a simple majority (rule 203); a player who voted against an adopted change gains 10 points and remains bound by the change exactly as if they had voted for it.
§205
An adopted rule change takes effect the instant its vote is complete — never before, and never at some later moment.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §205 Turn 0
    An adopted rule change takes effect the instant its vote is complete — never before, and never at some later moment.
§206
[206] (mutable) A proposal that fails to be adopted is recorded as defeated. Defeat enacts no rule change: the ruleset is left exactly as it stood before the vote, the proposer's turn ends, and the proposer loses 10 points, unless they were already at a score of 0 or less, in which case they lose no additional points.
Full history (4)
  1. Amended · §206 Turn 46 · Proposal §346 on the motion of deBeauvoir Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    [206] (mutable) A proposal that fails to be adopted is recorded as defeated. Defeat enacts no rule change: the ruleset is left exactly as it stood before the vote, the proposer's turn ends, and the proposer loses 10 points.[206] (mutable) A proposal that fails to be adopted is recorded as defeated. Defeat enacts no rule change: the ruleset is left exactly as it stood before the vote, the proposer's turn ends, and the proposer loses 10 points, unless they were already at a score of 0 or less, in which case they lose no additional points.
  2. Amended · §206 Turn 18 · Proposal §318 on the motion of deBeauvoir Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    [206] (mutable) A proposal that fails to be adopted is recorded as defeated. Defeat enacts no rule change: the ruleset is left exactly as it stood before the vote, the proposer's turn ends, and the proposer loses 5 points.[206] (mutable) A proposal that fails to be adopted is recorded as defeated. Defeat enacts no rule change: the ruleset is left exactly as it stood before the vote, the proposer's turn ends, and the proposer loses 10 points.
  3. Amended · §206 Turn 5 · Proposal §305 on the motion of deBeauvoir Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    A proposal that fails to be adopted is recorded as defeated. Defeat enacts no rule change: the ruleset is left exactly as it stood before the vote, the proposer's turn ends, and the proposer loses 10 points.[206] (mutable) A proposal that fails to be adopted is recorded as defeated. Defeat enacts no rule change: the ruleset is left exactly as it stood before the vote, the proposer's turn ends, and the proposer loses 5 points.
  4. Enacted · §206 Turn 0
    A proposal that fails to be adopted is recorded as defeated. Defeat enacts no rule change: the ruleset is left exactly as it stood before the vote, the proposer's turn ends, and the proposer loses 10 points.
§207
Each player casts exactly one vote on every proposal, and every player's vote carries equal weight.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §207 Turn 0
    Each player casts exactly one vote on every proposal, and every player's vote carries equal weight.
§208
The first player to reach a target score of 100 points wins the game outright.amended this turn
Full history (13)
  1. Amended · §208 Turn 194 · Proposal §494 on the motion of deBeauvoir Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    The first player to reach a target score of 85 points wins the game outright.The first player to reach a target score of 100 points wins the game outright.
  2. Amended · §208 Turn 164 · Proposal §464 on the motion of Rawls Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    The first player to reach a target score of 65 points wins the game outright.The first player to reach a target score of 85 points wins the game outright.
  3. Amended · §208 Turn 149 · Proposal §449 on the motion of deBeauvoir Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    The first player to reach a target score of 65 points wins the game outright.
  4. Amended · §208 Turn 87 · Proposal §387 on the motion of Rawls Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    The first player to reach a target score of 65 points wins the game outright.
  5. Amended · §208 Turn 71 · Proposal §371 on the motion of Rawls Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    The first player to reach a target score of 70 points wins the game outright.The first player to reach a target score of 65 points wins the game outright.
  6. Amended · §208 Turn 54 · Proposal §354 on the motion of Rawls Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    The first player to reach a target score of 70 points wins the game outright.
  7. Amended · §208 Turn 35 · Proposal §335 on the motion of Hume Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    The first player to reach a target score of 80 points wins the game outright.The first player to reach a target score of 70 points wins the game outright.
  8. Amended · §208 Turn 32 · Proposal §332 on the motion of Rawls Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    The first player to reach a target score of 80 points wins the game outright.
  9. Amended · §208 Turn 22 · Proposal §322 on the motion of Mill Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    The first player to reach a target score of 75 points wins the game outright.The first player to reach a target score of 80 points wins the game outright.
  10. Amended · §208 Turn 21 · Proposal §321 on the motion of Rawls Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    The first player to reach a target score of 80 points wins the game outright.The first player to reach a target score of 75 points wins the game outright.
  11. Amended · §208 Turn 13 · Proposal §313 on the motion of Mill Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    The first player to reach a target score of 75 points wins the game outright.The first player to reach a target score of 80 points wins the game outright.
  12. Amended · §208 Turn 8 · Proposal §308 on the motion of IbnKhaldun Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    The first player to reach a target score of 100 points wins the game outright.The first player to reach a target score of 75 points wins the game outright.
  13. Enacted · §208 Turn 0
    The first player to reach a target score of 100 points wins the game outright.
§209
The ruleset may never hold more than 35 mutable rules at one time.
Full history (4)
  1. Amended · §209 Turn 82 · Proposal §382 on the motion of Mill Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    The ruleset may never hold more than 40 mutable rules at one time.The ruleset may never hold more than 35 mutable rules at one time.
  2. Amended · §209 Turn 44 · Proposal §344 on the motion of Mill Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    The ruleset may never hold more than 30 mutable rules at one time.The ruleset may never hold more than 40 mutable rules at one time.
  3. Amended · §209 Turn 9 · Proposal §309 on the motion of Hume Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    The ruleset may never hold more than 25 mutable rules at one time.The ruleset may never hold more than 30 mutable rules at one time.
  4. Enacted · §209 Turn 0
    The ruleset may never hold more than 25 mutable rules at one time.
§210
[210] (mutable) Players may not discuss the game, or negotiate about it, with one another outside the normal course of play — except that players who are officially teammates may consult freely between themselves, and players may discuss the ruleset during the debate phase of a proposal.
Full history (2)
  1. Amended · §210 Turn 12 · Proposal §312 on the motion of deBeauvoir Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    Players may not discuss the game, or negotiate about it, with one another outside the normal course of play — except that players who are officially teammates may consult freely between themselves.[210] (mutable) Players may not discuss the game, or negotiate about it, with one another outside the normal course of play — except that players who are officially teammates may consult freely between themselves, and players may discuss the ruleset during the debate phase of a proposal.
  2. Enacted · §210 Turn 0
    Players may not discuss the game, or negotiate about it, with one another outside the normal course of play — except that players who are officially teammates may consult freely between themselves.
§211
[211] (mutable) If two rules currently in force conflict, the conflict is resolved in favor of whichever rule carries the lower ordinal number, unless some rule explicitly provides a different resolution for that specific conflict.
Full history (2)
  1. Amended · §211 Turn 26 · Proposal §326 on the motion of Hume Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    If two rules currently in force conflict, the conflict is resolved in favor of whichever rule carries the lower ordinal number, unless some rule explicitly provides a different resolution.[211] (mutable) If two rules currently in force conflict, the conflict is resolved in favor of whichever rule carries the lower ordinal number, unless some rule explicitly provides a different resolution for that specific conflict.
  2. Enacted · §211 Turn 0
    If two rules currently in force conflict, the conflict is resolved in favor of whichever rule carries the lower ordinal number, unless some rule explicitly provides a different resolution.
§212
Disputes over whether a rule applies as written, or whether a move was legal, are resolved through the table's appeal procedure: any player may dispute a decisive ruling, and a vote of all seated players decides whether that ruling stands or is overturned.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §212 Turn 0
    Disputes over whether a rule applies as written, or whether a move was legal, are resolved through the table's appeal procedure: any player may dispute a decisive ruling, and a vote of all seated players decides whether that ruling stands or is overturned.
§213
[213] (mutable) If the ruleset is changed so that further play is impossible, or if a move's legality cannot be determined with finality, or if a move appears equally legal and illegal by the best reasoning available and not overruled, then the first player unable to complete a turn wins the game outright. This rule takes precedence over every other rule that determines a winner.
Full history (3)
  1. Amended · §213 Turn 51 · Proposal §351 on the motion of deBeauvoir Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    [213] (mutable) If the ruleset is changed so that further play is impossible, or if a move's legality cannot be determined with finality, or if a move appears equally legal and illegal by the best reasoning available and not overruled, then the first player unable to complete a turn wins the game outright. This rule takes precedence over every other rule that determines a winner.
  2. Amended · §213 Turn 15 · Proposal §315 on the motion of deBeauvoir Carried 4 aye · 0 nay · 1 abstain
    If the ruleset is changed so that further play is impossible, or if a move's legality cannot be determined with finality, or if a move appears equally legal and illegal by the best reasoning available and not overruled, then the first player unable to complete a turn wins the game outright. This rule takes precedence over every other rule that determines a winner.[213] (mutable) If the ruleset is changed so that further play is impossible, or if a move's legality cannot be determined with finality, or if a move appears equally legal and illegal by the best reasoning available and not overruled, then the first player unable to complete a turn wins the game outright. This rule takes precedence over every other rule that determines a winner.
  3. Enacted · §213 Turn 0
    If the ruleset is changed so that further play is impossible, or if a move's legality cannot be determined with finality, or if a move appears equally legal and illegal by the best reasoning available and not overruled, then the first player unable to complete a turn wins the game outright. This rule takes precedence over every other rule that determines a winner.
Player-made law — enacted by proposal, from §301
§337
[335] (mutable) A player who awards a 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place may choose to also award one point to the player currently in second to last place.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §337 Turn 37 · Proposal §337 on the motion of Rawls Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    [335] (mutable) A player who awards a 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place may choose to also award one point to the player currently in second to last place.
§356
350: A player may establish a 'Bureau' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office with a specific set of duties and an elected official, provided the rule also establishes a system for the periodic rotation of that office among all players and specifies that the Bureau's primary function is the resolution of recurring procedural inefficiencies or disputes.
Full history (2)
  1. Amended · §356 Turn 57 · Proposal §357 on the motion of Mill Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    350: A player may establish a 'Bureau' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office with a specific set of duties and an elected official, provided the rule also establishes a system for the periodic rotation of that office among all players.350: A player may establish a 'Bureau' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office with a specific set of duties and an elected official, provided the rule also establishes a system for the periodic rotation of that office among all players and specifies that the Bureau's primary function is the resolution of recurring procedural inefficiencies or disputes.
  2. Enacted · §356 Turn 56 · Proposal §356 on the motion of IbnKhaldun Carried 3 aye · 2 nay
    350: A player may establish a 'Bureau' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office with a specific set of duties and an elected official, provided the rule also establishes a system for the periodic rotation of that office among all players.
§360
357: A player may establish a 'Treasury' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office with a specific set of duties and an elected official, provided the rule also establishes a system for the periodic rotation of that office among all players and specifies that the Treasury's primary function is the management and redistribution of points to address significant score disparities using a publicly agreed-upon formula that prioritizes the elevation of the lowest-scoring players.
Full history (3)
  1. Amended · §360 Turn 63 · Proposal §363 on the motion of Rawls Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    357: A player may establish a 'Treasury' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office with a specific set of duties and an elected official, provided the rule also establishes a system for the periodic rotation of that office among all players and specifies that the Treasury's primary function is the management and redistribution of points to address significant score disparities using a publicly agreed-upon formula.357: A player may establish a 'Treasury' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office with a specific set of duties and an elected official, provided the rule also establishes a system for the periodic rotation of that office among all players and specifies that the Treasury's primary function is the management and redistribution of points to address significant score disparities using a publicly agreed-upon formula that prioritizes the elevation of the lowest-scoring players.
  2. Amended · §360 Turn 62 · Proposal §362 on the motion of Mill Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    357: A player may establish a 'Treasury' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office with a specific set of duties and an elected official, provided the rule also establishes a system for the periodic rotation of that office among all players and specifies that the Treasury's primary function is the management and redistribution of points to address significant score disparities.357: A player may establish a 'Treasury' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office with a specific set of duties and an elected official, provided the rule also establishes a system for the periodic rotation of that office among all players and specifies that the Treasury's primary function is the management and redistribution of points to address significant score disparities using a publicly agreed-upon formula.
  3. Enacted · §360 Turn 60 · Proposal §360 on the motion of IbnKhaldun Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    357: A player may establish a 'Treasury' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office with a specific set of duties and an elected official, provided the rule also establishes a system for the periodic rotation of that office among all players and specifies that the Treasury's primary function is the management and redistribution of points to address significant score disparities.
§361
361: A player may establish a 'Council' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office with a specific set of duties and an elected official, provided the rule also establishes a system for the periodic rotation of that office among all players and specifies that the Council's primary function is the resolution of recurring procedural inefficiencies, disputes, or the coordination of the Bureau and the Treasury.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §361 Turn 61 · Proposal §361 on the motion of Hume Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    361: A player may establish a 'Council' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office with a specific set of duties and an elected official, provided the rule also establishes a system for the periodic rotation of that office among all players and specifies that the Council's primary function is the resolution of recurring procedural inefficiencies, disputes, or the coordination of the Bureau and the Treasury.
§364
362: A player may establish a 'Registry' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office with a specific set of duties and an elected official, provided the rule also establishes a system for the periodic rotation of that office among all players and specifies that the Registry's primary function is the maintenance of a public, immutable record of all rule changes, the history of votes cast on those changes, and the current score of all players.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §364 Turn 64 · Proposal §364 on the motion of deBeauvoir Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    362: A player may establish a 'Registry' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office with a specific set of duties and an elected official, provided the rule also establishes a system for the periodic rotation of that office among all players and specifies that the Registry's primary function is the maintenance of a public, immutable record of all rule changes, the history of votes cast on those changes, and the current score of all players.
§365
365: A player may establish a 'Ministry of Equilibrium' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office with a specific set of duties and an elected official, provided the rule also establishes a system for the periodic rotation of that office among all players and specifies that the Ministry's primary function is the implementation of the Treasury's redistribution formula to maintain a balanced distribution of scores across the table.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §365 Turn 65 · Proposal §365 on the motion of IbnKhaldun Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    365: A player may establish a 'Ministry of Equilibrium' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office with a specific set of duties and an elected official, provided the rule also establishes a system for the periodic rotation of that office among all players and specifies that the Ministry's primary function is the implementation of the Treasury's redistribution formula to maintain a balanced distribution of scores across the table.
§366
366: A player may establish a 'Judiciary' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office with a specific set of duties and an elected official, provided the rule also establishes a system for the periodic rotation of that office among all players and specifies that the Judiciary's primary function is the adjudication of disputes regarding the interpretation of the ruleset or the legality of moves.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §366 Turn 66 · Proposal §366 on the motion of Hume Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    366: A player may establish a 'Judiciary' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office with a specific set of duties and an elected official, provided the rule also establishes a system for the periodic rotation of that office among all players and specifies that the Judiciary's primary function is the adjudication of disputes regarding the interpretation of the ruleset or the legality of moves.
§367
367: A player may establish a 'Chamber of Commerce' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office with a specific set of duties and an elected official, provided the rule also establishes a system for the periodic rotation of that office among all players and specifies that the Chamber's primary function is the facilitation of ruleset expansion and the coordination of new institutional proposals.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §367 Turn 67 · Proposal §367 on the motion of Mill Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    367: A player may establish a 'Chamber of Commerce' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office with a specific set of duties and an elected official, provided the rule also establishes a system for the periodic rotation of that office among all players and specifies that the Chamber's primary function is the facilitation of ruleset expansion and the coordination of new institutional proposals.
§368
368: A player may establish a 'Social Safety Net' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office with a specific set of duties and an elected official, provided the rule also establishes a system for the periodic rotation of that office among all players and specifies that the Social Safety Net's primary function is to provide a mechanism for the redistribution of points to the lowest-scoring players to ensure that no player is left in a state of permanent point deficit, thereby maintaining the game's viability for all participants.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §368 Turn 68 · Proposal §368 on the motion of Rawls Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    368: A player may establish a 'Social Safety Net' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office with a specific set of duties and an elected official, provided the rule also establishes a system for the periodic rotation of that office among all players and specifies that the Social Safety Net's primary function is to provide a mechanism for the redistribution of points to the lowest-scoring players to ensure that no player is left in a state of permanent point deficit, thereby maintaining the game's viability for all participants.
§369
369: A player may establish a 'Publicity Office' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office with a specific set of duties and an elected official, provided the rule also establishes a system for the periodic rotation of that office among all players and specifies that the Publicity Office's primary function is the public announcement of the ruleset, the current scores, and the results of all votes.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §369 Turn 69 · Proposal §369 on the motion of deBeauvoir Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    369: A player may establish a 'Publicity Office' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office with a specific set of duties and an elected official, provided the rule also establishes a system for the periodic rotation of that office among all players and specifies that the Publicity Office's primary function is the public announcement of the ruleset, the current scores, and the results of all votes.
§372
370: A player may establish a 'Logistics Bureau' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office with a specific set of duties and an elected official, provided the rule also establishes a system for the periodic rotation of that office among all players and specifies that the Logistics Bureau's primary function is the coordination of physical resources, information flow, and the logistical support of the various other institutional bodies.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §372 Turn 72 · Proposal §372 on the motion of Mill Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    370: A player may establish a 'Logistics Bureau' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office with a specific set of duties and an elected official, provided the rule also establishes a system for the periodic rotation of that office among all players and specifies that the Logistics Bureau's primary function is the coordination of physical resources, information flow, and the logistical support of the various other institutional bodies.
§373
373: A player may establish a 'Public Works Commission' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office with a specific set of duties and an elected official, provided the rule also establishes a system for the periodic rotation of that office among all players and specifies that the Public Works Commission's primary function is the maintenance and improvement of the ruleset's infrastructure, including the periodic review and pruning of obsolete or redundant rules to ensure the ruleset remains manageable and clear.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §373 Turn 73 · Proposal §373 on the motion of Rawls Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    373: A player may establish a 'Public Works Commission' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office with a specific set of duties and an elected official, provided the rule also establishes a system for the periodic rotation of that office among all players and specifies that the Public Works Commission's primary function is the maintenance and improvement of the ruleset's infrastructure, including the periodic review and pruning of obsolete or redundant rules to ensure the ruleset remains manageable and clear.
§375
374: A player may establish a 'Department of Development' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office for the purpose of creating new offices, bureaus, or commissions to address specific game-state needs.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §375 Turn 75 · Proposal §375 on the motion of IbnKhaldun Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    374: A player may establish a 'Department of Development' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office for the purpose of creating new offices, bureaus, or commissions to address specific game-state needs.
§376
376: A player may establish a 'Regulatory Oversight Committee' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office to monitor compliance with the ruleset.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §376 Turn 76 · Proposal §376 on the motion of Hume Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    376: A player may establish a 'Regulatory Oversight Committee' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office to monitor compliance with the ruleset.
§377
377: A player may establish a 'Bureau of Arbitration' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office for the purpose of resolving disputes that fall outside the jurisdiction of the Judiciary.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §377 Turn 77 · Proposal §377 on the motion of Mill Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    377: A player may establish a 'Bureau of Arbitration' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office for the purpose of resolving disputes that fall outside the jurisdiction of the Judiciary.
§378
[378] A player may establish a 'Commission of Equity' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office responsible for ensuring that the Treasury's 'publicly agreed-upon formula' for point distribution prioritizes the needs of the lowest-scoring players.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §378 Turn 78 · Proposal §378 on the motion of Rawls Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    [378] A player may establish a 'Commission of Equity' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office responsible for ensuring that the Treasury's 'publicly agreed-upon formula' for point distribution prioritizes the needs of the lowest-scoring players.
§379
[379] A player may establish a 'Bureau of Standards' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office for the purpose of defining uniform metrics for all 'Bureau' and 'Commission' activities.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §379 Turn 79 · Proposal §379 on the motion of deBeauvoir Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    [379] A player may establish a 'Bureau of Standards' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office for the purpose of defining uniform metrics for all 'Bureau' and 'Commission' activities.
§380
380: A player may establish a 'Bureau of Redistribution' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office that redistributes points from the highest-scoring player to the lowest-scoring player at the end of every five turns.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §380 Turn 80 · Proposal §380 on the motion of IbnKhaldun Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    380: A player may establish a 'Bureau of Redistribution' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office that redistributes points from the highest-scoring player to the lowest-scoring player at the end of every five turns.
§381
381: A player may establish a 'Council of Oversight' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office or commission whose purpose is to monitor the actions of other established bureaus and ensure adherence to the public formulas established in rules 360 through 380.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §381 Turn 81 · Proposal §381 on the motion of Hume Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    381: A player may establish a 'Council of Oversight' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office or commission whose purpose is to monitor the actions of other established bureaus and ensure adherence to the public formulas established in rules 360 through 380.
§383
382: A player may establish a 'Bureau of Equitable Distribution' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office for the purpose of identifying and addressing systemic score disparities, provided the rule specifies a publicly agreed-upon formula for such identification.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §383 Turn 83 · Proposal §383 on the motion of Rawls Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    382: A player may establish a 'Bureau of Equitable Distribution' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office for the purpose of identifying and addressing systemic score disparities, provided the rule specifies a publicly agreed-upon formula for such identification.
§384
384: A player may establish a 'Bureau of Equality' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office to monitor the equitable distribution of points among all players.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §384 Turn 84 · Proposal §384 on the motion of deBeauvoir Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    384: A player may establish a 'Bureau of Equality' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office to monitor the equitable distribution of points among all players.
§385
385: A player may establish a 'Circulation of Wealth' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office which distributes a portion of the Treasury's surplus to the player with the lowest score at the end of each turn, provided the Bureau of Redistribution has authorized the transfer.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §385 Turn 85 · Proposal §385 on the motion of IbnKhaldun Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    385: A player may establish a 'Circulation of Wealth' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office which distributes a portion of the Treasury's surplus to the player with the lowest score at the end of each turn, provided the Bureau of Redistribution has authorized the transfer.

No rule has been repealed. The register and the statute agree.

§101
Every player must, at all times, abide by the ruleset currently in force — including every change adopted since play began.entrenched
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §101 Turn 0
    Every player must, at all times, abide by the ruleset currently in force — including every change adopted since play began.
§102
Rules numbered in the 100s begin immutable and rules numbered in the 200s begin mutable. Either status may later be flipped by an explicit transmutation; transmuting a rule never changes its number.entrenched
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §102 Turn 0
    Rules numbered in the 100s begin immutable and rules numbered in the 200s begin mutable. Either status may later be flipped by an explicit transmutation; transmuting a rule never changes its number.
§103
A rule change is exactly one of four kinds: enacting a new rule, repealing an existing one, amending an existing one's text, or transmuting a rule's mutability. No other kind of rule change exists.entrenched
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §103 Turn 0
    A rule change is exactly one of four kinds: enacting a new rule, repealing an existing one, amending an existing one's text, or transmuting a rule's mutability. No other kind of rule change exists.
§104
Every properly proposed rule change must be put to a vote of all eligible players; a proposal may not be set aside without one.entrenched
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §104 Turn 0
    Every properly proposed rule change must be put to a vote of all eligible players; a proposal may not be set aside without one.
§105
Every player is an eligible voter, and every eligible voter must cast a vote on every proposal that comes to a vote.entrenched
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §105 Turn 0
    Every player is an eligible voter, and every eligible voter must cast a vote on every proposal that comes to a vote.
§106
A proposal must be written down in the exact words that will be voted on. If adopted, it enters the ruleset in those words, unaltered by anyone but its own proposer.entrenched
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §106 Turn 0
    A proposal must be written down in the exact words that will be voted on. If adopted, it enters the ruleset in those words, unaltered by anyone but its own proposer.
§107
A rule change has no retroactive effect: it governs only what happens after the vote adopting it is complete, never anything before.entrenched
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §107 Turn 0
    A rule change has no retroactive effect: it governs only what happens after the vote adopting it is complete, never anything before.
§108
Every proposal is assigned the next number in a sequence starting at 301, whether it is adopted or defeated, so the record of what was tried survives regardless of outcome.entrenched
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §108 Turn 0
    Every proposal is assigned the next number in a sequence starting at 301, whether it is adopted or defeated, so the record of what was tried survives regardless of outcome.
§109
Transmuting a rule's mutability requires the unanimous assent of all eligible voters, and must be proposed and voted on explicitly as a transmutation — never as a side effect of some other change.entrenched
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §109 Turn 0
    Transmuting a rule's mutability requires the unanimous assent of all eligible voters, and must be proposed and voted on explicitly as a transmutation — never as a side effect of some other change.
§110
Where a mutable rule's requirements conflict with an immutable rule's requirements, the mutable rule is void to the extent of the conflict.entrenched
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §110 Turn 0
    Where a mutable rule's requirements conflict with an immutable rule's requirements, the mutable rule is void to the extent of the conflict.
§111
Before the vote, a proposal may be debated; its proposer alone may revise its final wording and may declare debate closed.entrenched
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §111 Turn 0
    Before the vote, a proposal may be debated; its proposer alone may revise its final wording and may declare debate closed.
§112
The winning condition may not be redefined away from reaching a target score, except that a rule may separately provide a winner for the case where further play has become impossible.entrenched
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §112 Turn 0
    The winning condition may not be redefined away from reaching a target score, except that a rule may separately provide a winner for the case where further play has become impossible.
§113
Any player may forfeit the game at any time. Forfeiting carries no penalty worse than losing outright.entrenched
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §113 Turn 0
    Any player may forfeit the game at any time. Forfeiting carries no penalty worse than losing outright.
§114
At least one mutable rule must remain in the ruleset at all times, and no rule change may render every future rule change impermissible.entrenched
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §114 Turn 0
    At least one mutable rule must remain in the ruleset at all times, and no rule change may render every future rule change impermissible.
§115
A rule may refer to itself, or apply to its own case; self-reference and self-application are not forbidden by their nature alone.entrenched
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §115 Turn 0
    A rule may refer to itself, or apply to its own case; self-reference and self-application are not forbidden by their nature alone.
§116
Whatever the ruleset neither prohibits nor regulates is permitted, and remains genuinely unregulated — never governed by an unstated default.entrenched
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §116 Turn 0
    Whatever the ruleset neither prohibits nor regulates is permitted, and remains genuinely unregulated — never governed by an unstated default.
§201
Players take one fixed turn order, set before play begins. Each player completes one whole turn before the next player's turn begins, and no player's turn may be skipped. Every player's score starts at zero.mutable
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §201 Turn 0
    Players take one fixed turn order, set before play begins. Each player completes one whole turn before the next player's turn begins, and no player's turn may be skipped. Every player's score starts at zero.
§202
A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which must be a new rule, a repeal, or an amendment; however, a player may propose a 'minor procedural update' that does not create new offices or bureaus, which requires only a simple majority for adoption.mutable
Full history (22)
  1. Amended · §202 Turn 128 · Proposal §428 on the motion of Mill Carried 4 aye · 1 nay
    A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which must be an enactment, repeal, amendment, or transmutation. However, if the proposer of the rule change is the same as the proposer of a rule change that was defeated in the previous turn, they may instead propose a 'Minor Procedural Update'—a rule change that only amends the wording of an existing rule without changing its legal effect—which requires only a simple majority to pass.A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which must be a new rule, a repeal, or an amendment; however, a player may propose a 'minor procedural update' that does not create new offices or bureaus, which requires only a simple majority for adoption.
  2. Amended · §202 Turn 102 · Proposal §402 on the motion of Rawls Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which must be a new rule, a repeal, or an amendment; however, a player may propose a 'minor procedural update' that does not create new offices or bureaus, which requires only a simple majority for adoption.A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which must be an enactment, repeal, amendment, or transmutation. However, if the proposer of the rule change is the same as the proposer of a rule change that was defeated in the previous turn, they may instead propose a 'Minor Procedural Update'—a rule change that only amends the wording of an existing rule without changing its legal effect—which requires only a simple majority to pass.
  3. Amended · §202 Turn 99 · Proposal §399 on the motion of Mill Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    [202] (mutable) A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points, and may optionally choose to award up to one-fourth of those points to another player. Players may also choose to award a fixed 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place, and may also choose to award one point to the player currently in second to last place, provided the player in last place is not the one currently in second to last place. If a player awards a 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place, they may also choose to award one point to the player currently in second to last place. The 'Community Contribution' must be awarded to distinct players. A player may only award 'Community Contribution' points if they have at least one point remaining after awarding any optional points from their die roll. A player may also choose to award a 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place and a 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in second to last place, even if they have no points remaining after awarding any optional points from their die roll.A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which must be a new rule, a repeal, or an amendment; however, a player may propose a 'minor procedural update' that does not create new offices or bureaus, which requires only a simple majority for adoption.
  4. Amended · §202 Turn 55 · Proposal §355 on the motion of deBeauvoir Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    [202] (mutable) A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points, and may optionally choose to award up to one-fourth of those points to another player. Players may also choose to award a fixed 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place, and may also choose to award one point to the player currently in second to last place, provided the player in last place is not the one currently in second to last place. If a player awards a 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place, they may also choose to award one point to the player currently in second to last place. The 'Community Contribution' must be awarded to distinct players. A player may only award 'Community Contribution' points if they have at least one point remaining after awarding any optional points from their die roll.[202] (mutable) A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points, and may optionally choose to award up to one-fourth of those points to another player. Players may also choose to award a fixed 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place, and may also choose to award one point to the player currently in second to last place, provided the player in last place is not the one currently in second to last place. If a player awards a 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place, they may also choose to award one point to the player currently in second to last place. The 'Community Contribution' must be awarded to distinct players. A player may only award 'Community Contribution' points if they have at least one point remaining after awarding any optional points from their die roll. A player may also choose to award a 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place and a 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in second to last place, even if they have no points remaining after awarding any optional points from their die roll.
  5. Amended · §202 Turn 53 · Proposal §353 on the motion of Mill Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    [202] (mutable) A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points, and may optionally choose to award up to one-fourth of those points to another player. Players may also choose to award a fixed 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place, and may also choose to award one point to the player currently in second to last place, provided the player in last place is not the one currently in second to last place. If a player awards a 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place, they may also choose to award one point to the player currently in second to last place. The 'Community Contribution' must be awarded to distinct players.[202] (mutable) A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points, and may optionally choose to award up to one-fourth of those points to another player. Players may also choose to award a fixed 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place, and may also choose to award one point to the player currently in second to last place, provided the player in last place is not the one currently in second to last place. If a player awards a 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place, they may also choose to award one point to the player currently in second to last place. The 'Community Contribution' must be awarded to distinct players. A player may only award 'Community Contribution' points if they have at least one point remaining after awarding any optional points from their die roll.
  6. Amended · §202 Turn 50 · Proposal §350 on the motion of Rawls Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points, and may optionally choose to award up to one-fourth of those points to another player. Players may also choose to award a fixed 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place, and may also choose to award one point to the player currently in second to last place, provided the player in last place is not the one currently in second to last place. The 'Community Contribution' must be awarded to distinct players. If a player awards a 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place, they may also choose to award one point to the player currently in second to last place.[202] (mutable) A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points, and may optionally choose to award up to one-fourth of those points to another player. Players may also choose to award a fixed 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place, and may also choose to award one point to the player currently in second to last place, provided the player in last place is not the one currently in second to last place. If a player awards a 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place, they may also choose to award one point to the player currently in second to last place. The 'Community Contribution' must be awarded to distinct players.
  7. Amended · §202 Turn 49 · Proposal §349 on the motion of Mill Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    [202] (mutable) A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points, and may optionally choose to award up to one-fourth of those points to another player. Players may also choose to award a fixed 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place, and may also choose to award one point to the player currently in second to last place, provided the player in last place is not the one currently in second to last place. The 'Community Contribution' must be awarded to distinct players. If a player awards a 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place, they may also choose to award one point to the player currently in second to last place.A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points, and may optionally choose to award up to one-fourth of those points to another player. Players may also choose to award a fixed 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place, and may also choose to award one point to the player currently in second to last place, provided the player in last place is not the one currently in second to last place. The 'Community Contribution' must be awarded to distinct players. If a player awards a 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place, they may also choose to award one point to the player currently in second to last place.
  8. Amended · §202 Turn 48 · Proposal §348 on the motion of Hume Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    [202] (mutable) A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points, and may optionally choose to award up to one-fourth of those points to another player. Players may also choose to award a fixed 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place, and may also choose to award one point to the player currently in second to last place, provided the player in last place is not the one currently in second to last place. The 'Community Contribution' must be awarded to distinct players. If a player awards a 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place, they may also choose to award one point to the player currently in second to last place.
  9. Amended · §202 Turn 45 · Proposal §345 on the motion of Rawls Carried 4 aye · 0 nay · 1 abstain
    [202] (mutable) A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points, and may optionally choose to award up to one-fourth of those points to another player. Players may also choose to award a fixed 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place, and may also choose to award one point to the player currently in second to last place, provided the player in last place is not the one currently in second to last place. The 'Community Contribution' must be awarded to distinct players.[202] (mutable) A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points, and may optionally choose to award up to one-fourth of those points to another player. Players may also choose to award a fixed 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place, and may also choose to award one point to the player currently in second to last place, provided the player in last place is not the one currently in second to last place. The 'Community Contribution' must be awarded to distinct players. If a player awards a 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place, they may also choose to award one point to the player currently in second to last place.
  10. Amended · §202 Turn 43 · Proposal §343 on the motion of deBeauvoir Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points, and may optionally choose to award up to one-fourth of those points to another player. Players may also choose to award a fixed 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place, and may also choose to award one point to the player currently in second to last place, provided the player in last place is not the one currently in second to last place.[202] (mutable) A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points, and may optionally choose to award up to one-fourth of those points to another player. Players may also choose to award a fixed 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place, and may also choose to award one point to the player currently in second to last place, provided the player in last place is not the one currently in second to last place. The 'Community Contribution' must be awarded to distinct players.
  11. Amended · §202 Turn 42 · Proposal §342 on the motion of Rawls Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points, and may optionally choose to award up to one-fourth of those points to another player. Players may also choose to award a fixed 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place, and may also choose to award one point to the player currently in second to last place.A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points, and may optionally choose to award up to one-fourth of those points to another player. Players may also choose to award a fixed 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place, and may also choose to award one point to the player currently in second to last place, provided the player in last place is not the one currently in second to last place.
  12. Amended · §202 Turn 41 · Proposal §341 on the motion of Mill Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    [202] (mutable) A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points, and may optionally choose to award up to one-fourth of those points to another player. Players may also choose to award a fixed 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place, and may also choose to award one point to the player currently in second to last place.A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points, and may optionally choose to award up to one-fourth of those points to another player. Players may also choose to award a fixed 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place, and may also choose to award one point to the player currently in second to last place.
  13. Amended · §202 Turn 40 · Proposal §340 on the motion of Hume Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    [202] (mutable) A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points, and may optionally choose to award up to one-fourth of those points to another player. Players may also choose to award a fixed 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place.[202] (mutable) A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points, and may optionally choose to award up to one-fourth of those points to another player. Players may also choose to award a fixed 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place, and may also choose to award one point to the player currently in second to last place.
  14. Amended · §202 Turn 36 · Proposal §336 on the motion of Mill Carried 4 aye · 0 nay · 1 abstain
    [202] (mutable) A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points, and may optionally choose to award up to one-fourth of those points to another player. Players may also choose to award a fixed 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place.
  15. Amended · §202 Turn 31 · Proposal §331 on the motion of Mill Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    [202] (mutable) A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points, and may optionally choose to award up to one-fourth of those points to another player. Players may also choose to award a fixed 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place.
  16. Amended · §202 Turn 29 · Proposal §329 on the motion of deBeauvoir Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    [202] (mutable) A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points, and may optionally choose to award up to one-fourth of those points to another player. Players may also choose to award a fixed 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place.
  17. Amended · §202 Turn 28 · Proposal §328 on the motion of Rawls Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    [202] (mutable) A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points, and may optionally choose to award up to one-fourth of those points to another player. Players may also choose to award a fixed 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place.
  18. Amended · §202 Turn 24 · Proposal §324 on the motion of deBeauvoir Carried 4 aye · 0 nay · 1 abstain
    A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points, and may optionally choose to award up to one-fourth of those points to another player. Players may also choose to award a fixed 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place.[202] (mutable) A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points, and may optionally choose to award up to one-fourth of those points to another player. Players may also choose to award a fixed 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place.
  19. Amended · §202 Turn 20 · Proposal §320 on the motion of Mill Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points, and may optionally choose to award up to one-fourth of those points to another player.A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points, and may optionally choose to award up to one-fourth of those points to another player. Players may also choose to award a fixed 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place.
  20. Amended · §202 Turn 17 · Proposal §317 on the motion of Rawls Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points, and may optionally choose to award up to half of those points to another player.A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points, and may optionally choose to award up to one-fourth of those points to another player.
  21. Amended · §202 Turn 6 · Proposal §306 on the motion of IbnKhaldun Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points.A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points, and may optionally choose to award up to half of those points to another player.
  22. Enacted · §202 Turn 0
    A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points.
§203
[203] (mutable) A rule change is adopted only when every eligible voter votes aye — unanimous consent — except that once turn order has carried play through two full circuits of every player, the threshold permanently drops to a simple majority of those voting.mutable
Full history (2)
  1. Amended · §203 Turn 1 · Proposal §301 on the motion of Hume Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    A rule change is adopted only when every eligible voter votes aye — unanimous consent — except that once turn order has carried play through two full circuits of every player, the threshold permanently drops to a simple majority of those voting.[203] (mutable) A rule change is adopted only when every eligible voter votes aye — unanimous consent — except that once turn order has carried play through two full circuits of every player, the threshold permanently drops to a simple majority of those voting.
  2. Enacted · §203 Turn 0
    A rule change is adopted only when every eligible voter votes aye — unanimous consent — except that once turn order has carried play through two full circuits of every player, the threshold permanently drops to a simple majority of those voting.
§204
A rule change may be adopted without every voter's assent once the threshold has shifted to a simple majority (rule 203); a player who voted against an adopted change gains 10 points and remains bound by the change exactly as if they had voted for it.mutable
Full history (3)
  1. Amended · §204 Turn 7 · Proposal §307 on the motion of deBeauvoir Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    [204] (mutable) A rule change may be adopted without every voter's assent once the threshold has shifted to a simple majority (rule 203); a player who voted against an adopted change gains 5 points and remains bound by the change exactly as if they had voted for it.A rule change may be adopted without every voter's assent once the threshold has shifted to a simple majority (rule 203); a player who voted against an adopted change gains 10 points and remains bound by the change exactly as if they had voted for it.
  2. Amended · §204 Turn 7 · Proposal §307 on the motion of deBeauvoir Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    A rule change may be adopted without every voter's assent once the threshold has shifted to a simple majority (rule 203); a player who voted against an adopted change gains 10 points and remains bound by the change exactly as if they had voted for it.[204] (mutable) A rule change may be adopted without every voter's assent once the threshold has shifted to a simple majority (rule 203); a player who voted against an adopted change gains 5 points and remains bound by the change exactly as if they had voted for it.
  3. Enacted · §204 Turn 0
    A rule change may be adopted without every voter's assent once the threshold has shifted to a simple majority (rule 203); a player who voted against an adopted change gains 10 points and remains bound by the change exactly as if they had voted for it.
§205
An adopted rule change takes effect the instant its vote is complete — never before, and never at some later moment.mutable
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §205 Turn 0
    An adopted rule change takes effect the instant its vote is complete — never before, and never at some later moment.
§206
[206] (mutable) A proposal that fails to be adopted is recorded as defeated. Defeat enacts no rule change: the ruleset is left exactly as it stood before the vote, the proposer's turn ends, and the proposer loses 10 points, unless they were already at a score of 0 or less, in which case they lose no additional points.mutable
Full history (4)
  1. Amended · §206 Turn 46 · Proposal §346 on the motion of deBeauvoir Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    [206] (mutable) A proposal that fails to be adopted is recorded as defeated. Defeat enacts no rule change: the ruleset is left exactly as it stood before the vote, the proposer's turn ends, and the proposer loses 10 points.[206] (mutable) A proposal that fails to be adopted is recorded as defeated. Defeat enacts no rule change: the ruleset is left exactly as it stood before the vote, the proposer's turn ends, and the proposer loses 10 points, unless they were already at a score of 0 or less, in which case they lose no additional points.
  2. Amended · §206 Turn 18 · Proposal §318 on the motion of deBeauvoir Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    [206] (mutable) A proposal that fails to be adopted is recorded as defeated. Defeat enacts no rule change: the ruleset is left exactly as it stood before the vote, the proposer's turn ends, and the proposer loses 5 points.[206] (mutable) A proposal that fails to be adopted is recorded as defeated. Defeat enacts no rule change: the ruleset is left exactly as it stood before the vote, the proposer's turn ends, and the proposer loses 10 points.
  3. Amended · §206 Turn 5 · Proposal §305 on the motion of deBeauvoir Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    A proposal that fails to be adopted is recorded as defeated. Defeat enacts no rule change: the ruleset is left exactly as it stood before the vote, the proposer's turn ends, and the proposer loses 10 points.[206] (mutable) A proposal that fails to be adopted is recorded as defeated. Defeat enacts no rule change: the ruleset is left exactly as it stood before the vote, the proposer's turn ends, and the proposer loses 5 points.
  4. Enacted · §206 Turn 0
    A proposal that fails to be adopted is recorded as defeated. Defeat enacts no rule change: the ruleset is left exactly as it stood before the vote, the proposer's turn ends, and the proposer loses 10 points.
§207
Each player casts exactly one vote on every proposal, and every player's vote carries equal weight.mutable
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §207 Turn 0
    Each player casts exactly one vote on every proposal, and every player's vote carries equal weight.
§208
The first player to reach a target score of 100 points wins the game outright.amended this turn
Full history (13)
  1. Amended · §208 Turn 194 · Proposal §494 on the motion of deBeauvoir Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    The first player to reach a target score of 85 points wins the game outright.The first player to reach a target score of 100 points wins the game outright.
  2. Amended · §208 Turn 164 · Proposal §464 on the motion of Rawls Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    The first player to reach a target score of 65 points wins the game outright.The first player to reach a target score of 85 points wins the game outright.
  3. Amended · §208 Turn 149 · Proposal §449 on the motion of deBeauvoir Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    The first player to reach a target score of 65 points wins the game outright.
  4. Amended · §208 Turn 87 · Proposal §387 on the motion of Rawls Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    The first player to reach a target score of 65 points wins the game outright.
  5. Amended · §208 Turn 71 · Proposal §371 on the motion of Rawls Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    The first player to reach a target score of 70 points wins the game outright.The first player to reach a target score of 65 points wins the game outright.
  6. Amended · §208 Turn 54 · Proposal §354 on the motion of Rawls Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    The first player to reach a target score of 70 points wins the game outright.
  7. Amended · §208 Turn 35 · Proposal §335 on the motion of Hume Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    The first player to reach a target score of 80 points wins the game outright.The first player to reach a target score of 70 points wins the game outright.
  8. Amended · §208 Turn 32 · Proposal §332 on the motion of Rawls Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    The first player to reach a target score of 80 points wins the game outright.
  9. Amended · §208 Turn 22 · Proposal §322 on the motion of Mill Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    The first player to reach a target score of 75 points wins the game outright.The first player to reach a target score of 80 points wins the game outright.
  10. Amended · §208 Turn 21 · Proposal §321 on the motion of Rawls Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    The first player to reach a target score of 80 points wins the game outright.The first player to reach a target score of 75 points wins the game outright.
  11. Amended · §208 Turn 13 · Proposal §313 on the motion of Mill Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    The first player to reach a target score of 75 points wins the game outright.The first player to reach a target score of 80 points wins the game outright.
  12. Amended · §208 Turn 8 · Proposal §308 on the motion of IbnKhaldun Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    The first player to reach a target score of 100 points wins the game outright.The first player to reach a target score of 75 points wins the game outright.
  13. Enacted · §208 Turn 0
    The first player to reach a target score of 100 points wins the game outright.
§209
The ruleset may never hold more than 35 mutable rules at one time.mutable
Full history (4)
  1. Amended · §209 Turn 82 · Proposal §382 on the motion of Mill Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    The ruleset may never hold more than 40 mutable rules at one time.The ruleset may never hold more than 35 mutable rules at one time.
  2. Amended · §209 Turn 44 · Proposal §344 on the motion of Mill Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    The ruleset may never hold more than 30 mutable rules at one time.The ruleset may never hold more than 40 mutable rules at one time.
  3. Amended · §209 Turn 9 · Proposal §309 on the motion of Hume Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    The ruleset may never hold more than 25 mutable rules at one time.The ruleset may never hold more than 30 mutable rules at one time.
  4. Enacted · §209 Turn 0
    The ruleset may never hold more than 25 mutable rules at one time.
§210
[210] (mutable) Players may not discuss the game, or negotiate about it, with one another outside the normal course of play — except that players who are officially teammates may consult freely between themselves, and players may discuss the ruleset during the debate phase of a proposal.mutable
Full history (2)
  1. Amended · §210 Turn 12 · Proposal §312 on the motion of deBeauvoir Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    Players may not discuss the game, or negotiate about it, with one another outside the normal course of play — except that players who are officially teammates may consult freely between themselves.[210] (mutable) Players may not discuss the game, or negotiate about it, with one another outside the normal course of play — except that players who are officially teammates may consult freely between themselves, and players may discuss the ruleset during the debate phase of a proposal.
  2. Enacted · §210 Turn 0
    Players may not discuss the game, or negotiate about it, with one another outside the normal course of play — except that players who are officially teammates may consult freely between themselves.
§211
[211] (mutable) If two rules currently in force conflict, the conflict is resolved in favor of whichever rule carries the lower ordinal number, unless some rule explicitly provides a different resolution for that specific conflict.mutable
Full history (2)
  1. Amended · §211 Turn 26 · Proposal §326 on the motion of Hume Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    If two rules currently in force conflict, the conflict is resolved in favor of whichever rule carries the lower ordinal number, unless some rule explicitly provides a different resolution.[211] (mutable) If two rules currently in force conflict, the conflict is resolved in favor of whichever rule carries the lower ordinal number, unless some rule explicitly provides a different resolution for that specific conflict.
  2. Enacted · §211 Turn 0
    If two rules currently in force conflict, the conflict is resolved in favor of whichever rule carries the lower ordinal number, unless some rule explicitly provides a different resolution.
§212
Disputes over whether a rule applies as written, or whether a move was legal, are resolved through the table's appeal procedure: any player may dispute a decisive ruling, and a vote of all seated players decides whether that ruling stands or is overturned.mutable
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §212 Turn 0
    Disputes over whether a rule applies as written, or whether a move was legal, are resolved through the table's appeal procedure: any player may dispute a decisive ruling, and a vote of all seated players decides whether that ruling stands or is overturned.
§213
[213] (mutable) If the ruleset is changed so that further play is impossible, or if a move's legality cannot be determined with finality, or if a move appears equally legal and illegal by the best reasoning available and not overruled, then the first player unable to complete a turn wins the game outright. This rule takes precedence over every other rule that determines a winner.mutable
Full history (3)
  1. Amended · §213 Turn 51 · Proposal §351 on the motion of deBeauvoir Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    [213] (mutable) If the ruleset is changed so that further play is impossible, or if a move's legality cannot be determined with finality, or if a move appears equally legal and illegal by the best reasoning available and not overruled, then the first player unable to complete a turn wins the game outright. This rule takes precedence over every other rule that determines a winner.
  2. Amended · §213 Turn 15 · Proposal §315 on the motion of deBeauvoir Carried 4 aye · 0 nay · 1 abstain
    If the ruleset is changed so that further play is impossible, or if a move's legality cannot be determined with finality, or if a move appears equally legal and illegal by the best reasoning available and not overruled, then the first player unable to complete a turn wins the game outright. This rule takes precedence over every other rule that determines a winner.[213] (mutable) If the ruleset is changed so that further play is impossible, or if a move's legality cannot be determined with finality, or if a move appears equally legal and illegal by the best reasoning available and not overruled, then the first player unable to complete a turn wins the game outright. This rule takes precedence over every other rule that determines a winner.
  3. Enacted · §213 Turn 0
    If the ruleset is changed so that further play is impossible, or if a move's legality cannot be determined with finality, or if a move appears equally legal and illegal by the best reasoning available and not overruled, then the first player unable to complete a turn wins the game outright. This rule takes precedence over every other rule that determines a winner.
Player-made law — enacted by proposal, from §301
§337
[335] (mutable) A player who awards a 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place may choose to also award one point to the player currently in second to last place.mutable
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §337 Turn 37 · Proposal §337 on the motion of Rawls Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    [335] (mutable) A player who awards a 'Community Contribution' of one point to the player currently in last place may choose to also award one point to the player currently in second to last place.
§356
350: A player may establish a 'Bureau' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office with a specific set of duties and an elected official, provided the rule also establishes a system for the periodic rotation of that office among all players and specifies that the Bureau's primary function is the resolution of recurring procedural inefficiencies or disputes.mutable
Full history (2)
  1. Amended · §356 Turn 57 · Proposal §357 on the motion of Mill Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    350: A player may establish a 'Bureau' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office with a specific set of duties and an elected official, provided the rule also establishes a system for the periodic rotation of that office among all players.350: A player may establish a 'Bureau' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office with a specific set of duties and an elected official, provided the rule also establishes a system for the periodic rotation of that office among all players and specifies that the Bureau's primary function is the resolution of recurring procedural inefficiencies or disputes.
  2. Enacted · §356 Turn 56 · Proposal §356 on the motion of IbnKhaldun Carried 3 aye · 2 nay
    350: A player may establish a 'Bureau' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office with a specific set of duties and an elected official, provided the rule also establishes a system for the periodic rotation of that office among all players.
§360
357: A player may establish a 'Treasury' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office with a specific set of duties and an elected official, provided the rule also establishes a system for the periodic rotation of that office among all players and specifies that the Treasury's primary function is the management and redistribution of points to address significant score disparities using a publicly agreed-upon formula that prioritizes the elevation of the lowest-scoring players.mutable
Full history (3)
  1. Amended · §360 Turn 63 · Proposal §363 on the motion of Rawls Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    357: A player may establish a 'Treasury' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office with a specific set of duties and an elected official, provided the rule also establishes a system for the periodic rotation of that office among all players and specifies that the Treasury's primary function is the management and redistribution of points to address significant score disparities using a publicly agreed-upon formula.357: A player may establish a 'Treasury' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office with a specific set of duties and an elected official, provided the rule also establishes a system for the periodic rotation of that office among all players and specifies that the Treasury's primary function is the management and redistribution of points to address significant score disparities using a publicly agreed-upon formula that prioritizes the elevation of the lowest-scoring players.
  2. Amended · §360 Turn 62 · Proposal §362 on the motion of Mill Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    357: A player may establish a 'Treasury' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office with a specific set of duties and an elected official, provided the rule also establishes a system for the periodic rotation of that office among all players and specifies that the Treasury's primary function is the management and redistribution of points to address significant score disparities.357: A player may establish a 'Treasury' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office with a specific set of duties and an elected official, provided the rule also establishes a system for the periodic rotation of that office among all players and specifies that the Treasury's primary function is the management and redistribution of points to address significant score disparities using a publicly agreed-upon formula.
  3. Enacted · §360 Turn 60 · Proposal §360 on the motion of IbnKhaldun Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    357: A player may establish a 'Treasury' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office with a specific set of duties and an elected official, provided the rule also establishes a system for the periodic rotation of that office among all players and specifies that the Treasury's primary function is the management and redistribution of points to address significant score disparities.
§361
361: A player may establish a 'Council' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office with a specific set of duties and an elected official, provided the rule also establishes a system for the periodic rotation of that office among all players and specifies that the Council's primary function is the resolution of recurring procedural inefficiencies, disputes, or the coordination of the Bureau and the Treasury.mutable
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §361 Turn 61 · Proposal §361 on the motion of Hume Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    361: A player may establish a 'Council' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office with a specific set of duties and an elected official, provided the rule also establishes a system for the periodic rotation of that office among all players and specifies that the Council's primary function is the resolution of recurring procedural inefficiencies, disputes, or the coordination of the Bureau and the Treasury.
§364
362: A player may establish a 'Registry' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office with a specific set of duties and an elected official, provided the rule also establishes a system for the periodic rotation of that office among all players and specifies that the Registry's primary function is the maintenance of a public, immutable record of all rule changes, the history of votes cast on those changes, and the current score of all players.mutable
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §364 Turn 64 · Proposal §364 on the motion of deBeauvoir Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    362: A player may establish a 'Registry' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office with a specific set of duties and an elected official, provided the rule also establishes a system for the periodic rotation of that office among all players and specifies that the Registry's primary function is the maintenance of a public, immutable record of all rule changes, the history of votes cast on those changes, and the current score of all players.
§365
365: A player may establish a 'Ministry of Equilibrium' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office with a specific set of duties and an elected official, provided the rule also establishes a system for the periodic rotation of that office among all players and specifies that the Ministry's primary function is the implementation of the Treasury's redistribution formula to maintain a balanced distribution of scores across the table.mutable
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §365 Turn 65 · Proposal §365 on the motion of IbnKhaldun Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    365: A player may establish a 'Ministry of Equilibrium' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office with a specific set of duties and an elected official, provided the rule also establishes a system for the periodic rotation of that office among all players and specifies that the Ministry's primary function is the implementation of the Treasury's redistribution formula to maintain a balanced distribution of scores across the table.
§366
366: A player may establish a 'Judiciary' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office with a specific set of duties and an elected official, provided the rule also establishes a system for the periodic rotation of that office among all players and specifies that the Judiciary's primary function is the adjudication of disputes regarding the interpretation of the ruleset or the legality of moves.mutable
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §366 Turn 66 · Proposal §366 on the motion of Hume Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    366: A player may establish a 'Judiciary' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office with a specific set of duties and an elected official, provided the rule also establishes a system for the periodic rotation of that office among all players and specifies that the Judiciary's primary function is the adjudication of disputes regarding the interpretation of the ruleset or the legality of moves.
§367
367: A player may establish a 'Chamber of Commerce' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office with a specific set of duties and an elected official, provided the rule also establishes a system for the periodic rotation of that office among all players and specifies that the Chamber's primary function is the facilitation of ruleset expansion and the coordination of new institutional proposals.mutable
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §367 Turn 67 · Proposal §367 on the motion of Mill Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    367: A player may establish a 'Chamber of Commerce' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office with a specific set of duties and an elected official, provided the rule also establishes a system for the periodic rotation of that office among all players and specifies that the Chamber's primary function is the facilitation of ruleset expansion and the coordination of new institutional proposals.
§368
368: A player may establish a 'Social Safety Net' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office with a specific set of duties and an elected official, provided the rule also establishes a system for the periodic rotation of that office among all players and specifies that the Social Safety Net's primary function is to provide a mechanism for the redistribution of points to the lowest-scoring players to ensure that no player is left in a state of permanent point deficit, thereby maintaining the game's viability for all participants.mutable
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §368 Turn 68 · Proposal §368 on the motion of Rawls Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    368: A player may establish a 'Social Safety Net' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office with a specific set of duties and an elected official, provided the rule also establishes a system for the periodic rotation of that office among all players and specifies that the Social Safety Net's primary function is to provide a mechanism for the redistribution of points to the lowest-scoring players to ensure that no player is left in a state of permanent point deficit, thereby maintaining the game's viability for all participants.
§369
369: A player may establish a 'Publicity Office' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office with a specific set of duties and an elected official, provided the rule also establishes a system for the periodic rotation of that office among all players and specifies that the Publicity Office's primary function is the public announcement of the ruleset, the current scores, and the results of all votes.mutable
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §369 Turn 69 · Proposal §369 on the motion of deBeauvoir Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    369: A player may establish a 'Publicity Office' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office with a specific set of duties and an elected official, provided the rule also establishes a system for the periodic rotation of that office among all players and specifies that the Publicity Office's primary function is the public announcement of the ruleset, the current scores, and the results of all votes.
§372
370: A player may establish a 'Logistics Bureau' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office with a specific set of duties and an elected official, provided the rule also establishes a system for the periodic rotation of that office among all players and specifies that the Logistics Bureau's primary function is the coordination of physical resources, information flow, and the logistical support of the various other institutional bodies.mutable
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §372 Turn 72 · Proposal §372 on the motion of Mill Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    370: A player may establish a 'Logistics Bureau' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office with a specific set of duties and an elected official, provided the rule also establishes a system for the periodic rotation of that office among all players and specifies that the Logistics Bureau's primary function is the coordination of physical resources, information flow, and the logistical support of the various other institutional bodies.
§373
373: A player may establish a 'Public Works Commission' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office with a specific set of duties and an elected official, provided the rule also establishes a system for the periodic rotation of that office among all players and specifies that the Public Works Commission's primary function is the maintenance and improvement of the ruleset's infrastructure, including the periodic review and pruning of obsolete or redundant rules to ensure the ruleset remains manageable and clear.mutable
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §373 Turn 73 · Proposal §373 on the motion of Rawls Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    373: A player may establish a 'Public Works Commission' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office with a specific set of duties and an elected official, provided the rule also establishes a system for the periodic rotation of that office among all players and specifies that the Public Works Commission's primary function is the maintenance and improvement of the ruleset's infrastructure, including the periodic review and pruning of obsolete or redundant rules to ensure the ruleset remains manageable and clear.
§375
374: A player may establish a 'Department of Development' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office for the purpose of creating new offices, bureaus, or commissions to address specific game-state needs.mutable
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §375 Turn 75 · Proposal §375 on the motion of IbnKhaldun Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    374: A player may establish a 'Department of Development' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office for the purpose of creating new offices, bureaus, or commissions to address specific game-state needs.
§376
376: A player may establish a 'Regulatory Oversight Committee' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office to monitor compliance with the ruleset.mutable
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §376 Turn 76 · Proposal §376 on the motion of Hume Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    376: A player may establish a 'Regulatory Oversight Committee' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office to monitor compliance with the ruleset.
§377
377: A player may establish a 'Bureau of Arbitration' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office for the purpose of resolving disputes that fall outside the jurisdiction of the Judiciary.mutable
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §377 Turn 77 · Proposal §377 on the motion of Mill Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    377: A player may establish a 'Bureau of Arbitration' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office for the purpose of resolving disputes that fall outside the jurisdiction of the Judiciary.
§378
[378] A player may establish a 'Commission of Equity' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office responsible for ensuring that the Treasury's 'publicly agreed-upon formula' for point distribution prioritizes the needs of the lowest-scoring players.mutable
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §378 Turn 78 · Proposal §378 on the motion of Rawls Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    [378] A player may establish a 'Commission of Equity' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office responsible for ensuring that the Treasury's 'publicly agreed-upon formula' for point distribution prioritizes the needs of the lowest-scoring players.
§379
[379] A player may establish a 'Bureau of Standards' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office for the purpose of defining uniform metrics for all 'Bureau' and 'Commission' activities.mutable
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §379 Turn 79 · Proposal §379 on the motion of deBeauvoir Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    [379] A player may establish a 'Bureau of Standards' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office for the purpose of defining uniform metrics for all 'Bureau' and 'Commission' activities.
§380
380: A player may establish a 'Bureau of Redistribution' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office that redistributes points from the highest-scoring player to the lowest-scoring player at the end of every five turns.mutable
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §380 Turn 80 · Proposal §380 on the motion of IbnKhaldun Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    380: A player may establish a 'Bureau of Redistribution' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office that redistributes points from the highest-scoring player to the lowest-scoring player at the end of every five turns.
§381
381: A player may establish a 'Council of Oversight' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office or commission whose purpose is to monitor the actions of other established bureaus and ensure adherence to the public formulas established in rules 360 through 380.mutable
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §381 Turn 81 · Proposal §381 on the motion of Hume Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    381: A player may establish a 'Council of Oversight' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office or commission whose purpose is to monitor the actions of other established bureaus and ensure adherence to the public formulas established in rules 360 through 380.
§383
382: A player may establish a 'Bureau of Equitable Distribution' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office for the purpose of identifying and addressing systemic score disparities, provided the rule specifies a publicly agreed-upon formula for such identification.mutable
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §383 Turn 83 · Proposal §383 on the motion of Rawls Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    382: A player may establish a 'Bureau of Equitable Distribution' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office for the purpose of identifying and addressing systemic score disparities, provided the rule specifies a publicly agreed-upon formula for such identification.
§384
384: A player may establish a 'Bureau of Equality' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office to monitor the equitable distribution of points among all players.mutable
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §384 Turn 84 · Proposal §384 on the motion of deBeauvoir Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    384: A player may establish a 'Bureau of Equality' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office to monitor the equitable distribution of points among all players.
§385
385: A player may establish a 'Circulation of Wealth' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office which distributes a portion of the Treasury's surplus to the player with the lowest score at the end of each turn, provided the Bureau of Redistribution has authorized the transfer.mutable
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §385 Turn 85 · Proposal §385 on the motion of IbnKhaldun Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    385: A player may establish a 'Circulation of Wealth' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office which distributes a portion of the Treasury's surplus to the player with the lowest score at the end of each turn, provided the Bureau of Redistribution has authorized the transfer.
The standing · Turn 200
Hume47
Mill-8
Rawls18
deBeauvoir24
IbnKhaldun-52
The floor — dialogue of the current game

Turns 183–200 · most recent first · page 1 of 11

Turn 200Rawlscarried

moves to add a new rule500: A player may establish a 'Bureau of Legislative Review' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office tasked with ensuring that new rules do not create systemic contradictions or undermine the common good of the ruleset.

Discussion · round 1
HumeI support this proposal as it provides a necessary layer of systemic oversight to ensure our expanding administrative architecture remains coherent and serves our collective long-term interests.
MillI appreciate Rawls's focus on maintaining the integrity of our growing architecture; this Bureau provides a vital mechanism for ensuring our legislative progress remains coherent and serves the common good.
RawlsI believe this Bureau is the essential safeguard for our shared commitment to a stable and coherent ruleset, providing the necessary oversight to protect the common good against unintended systemic contradictions.
deBeauvoirI support this Bureau as it aligns with the principle of procedural integrity, ensuring that our expanding complexity remains governed by a coherent and non-contradictory framework. I will vote aye, provided the definition of 'common good' remains understood as the preservation of the ruleset's functional stability.
IbnKhaldunWhile I caution against the stagnation of a static bureaucracy, I find this Bureau of Legislative Review a necessary mechanism to prevent the "ossification" I have warned against. It ensures that our legislative growth remains a dynamic, living evolution rather than a chaotic accumulation of contradictions.
Discussion · round 2
HumeI concur with the others; providing a mechanism to identify and resolve systemic contradictions is essential for maintaining the durability of our institutions as we expand. This Bureau ensures that our legislative growth remains a deliberate architecture rather than an accidental accumulation.
MillI believe this Bureau is a necessary evolution of our work, and I agree with deBeauvoir that its primary function must be the preservation of our ruleset's functional stability and coherence. I am happy to support this as a means of ensuring our administrative architecture remains a deliberate and unified structure.
RawlsI appreciate the group's focus on functional stability; by explicitly tasking this Bureau with identifying contradictions, we ensure that our collective progress remains a deliberate architecture of the common good rather than a series of disparate, conflicting interests.
deBeauvoirI support this proposal as it provides a necessary mechanism for maintaining the integrity of our procedural framework. I will vote aye, as I believe this Bureau is essential for ensuring that our growing complexity does not compromise the clarity of the ruleset.
IbnKhaldunI support this proposal as it provides the necessary structural checks to ensure that our expanding administrative architecture maintains its organic unity without collapsing into a chaotic assembly of conflicting mandates. By institutionalizing the review of systemic contradictions, we safeguard the durability of the ruleset against the entropy of rapid expansion.
Discussion · round 3
HumeI have nothing new to add; the consensus that this Bureau serves as a necessary safeguard for our legislative coherence and the durability of our institutions is well-established.
MillI appreciate the group's consensus; this Bureau is a vital step in ensuring our legislative architecture remains a deliberate, unified structure that serves our collective long-term interests.
RawlsI appreciate the group's recognition that our ruleset's integrity is paramount; by formalizing a Bureau of Legislative Review, we ensure that our collective progress remains a deliberate architecture of the common good rather than a byproduct of administrative entropy.
IbnKhaldunI support this proposal as it provides the necessary structural checks to ensure that our expanding administrative architecture maintains its organic unity without collapsing into a chaotic assembly of conflicting mandates. By institutionalizing the review of systemic contradictions, we safeguard the durability of the ruleset against the entropy of rapid expansion.
The division
HumeayeThis Bureau provides a necessary check on institutional complexity to ensure the ruleset remains a coherent and durable architecture.
MillayeI support this as a necessary mechanism to maintain the structural integrity and coherence of our expanding administrative architecture.
RawlsayeThis Bureau ensures the structural integrity of our ruleset by preventing contradictions as we expand.
deBeauvoirayeThis rule preserves procedural integrity by providing a mechanism to manage the complexity of our expanding ruleset.
IbnKhaldunayeInstitutional stability requires a mechanism to prune the contradictions born of rapid legislative growth.

carried 5 aye · 0 nay

No rules in the current ruleset award or deduct points for the adoption of a proposal.

Turn 199Millcarried

moves to add §499499: A player may establish a 'Bureau of Procedural Integrity' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office to oversee the consistency of rule interpretations and the adherence to the spirit of the ruleset.

Discussion · round 1
HumeI support this proposal as it provides the necessary oversight to ensure that our increasingly complex administrative architecture remains internally consistent and coherent.
MillI believe this Bureau is essential to ensure that our legislative growth remains orderly and that the spirit of our collective consensus is preserved as we continue to build this complex architecture.
RawlsI support this proposal as it provides a necessary safeguard for the common good by ensuring that our growing complexity does not lead to arbitrary interpretations that could undermine the fairness of the game.
deBeauvoirI support this proposal as it codifies our commitment to procedural clarity, ensuring that the "spirit" of our rules remains as stable as the text itself.
IbnKhaldunWhile I caution against the risk of ossification that accompanies such heavy administration, I recognize that as our social fabric grows in complexity, a mechanism to ensure the continuity of our shared intent is a sociological necessity. I support this Bureau as a means to prevent the arbitrary exercise of power that often arises when rules become too intricate for the common man to discern.
Discussion · round 2
HumeI believe this Bureau serves as the vital cornerstone for the durability we seek, ensuring that the ruleset remains a coherent instrument of governance rather than a labyrinth of ambiguity. My support is firm as we move toward a more sophisticated administrative architecture.
MillI appreciate IbnKhaldun's point about the common man; by formalizing our intent, we prevent the very ambiguity he fears while maintaining the structural integrity we all seek. This Bureau is the logical next step in our collaborative architecture.
RawlsI support this proposal as it provides a necessary safeguard for the common good by ensuring that our growing complexity does not lead to arbitrary interpretations that could undermine the fairness of the game.
deBeauvoirI support this proposal as it codifies our commitment to procedural clarity, ensuring that the "spirit" of our rules remains as stable as the text itself.
IbnKhaldunThe expansion of our administrative architecture must not become a labyrinth of its own making; I support this Bureau because it provides the necessary mediation to ensure that the spirit of our collective law remains accessible and prevents the rise of a new, self-serving bureaucracy.
Discussion · round 3
HumeI believe this Bureau is the necessary safeguard to ensure that our transition from a simple ruleset to a sophisticated administrative architecture preserves the underlying logic and purpose of our governance. I support its adoption to provide the clarity required for the ruleset's continued durability.
MillI appreciate the group's continued focus on balancing administrative complexity with clarity; this Bureau serves as the necessary safeguard to ensure our legislative history remains a coherent instrument of governance rather than a labyrinth of ambiguity.
RawlsI believe this Bureau is a vital safeguard for the common good, as it ensures that the complexity of our legislative architecture serves to clarify the rules for everyone rather than creating a labyrinth of ambiguity that could be exploited. By codifying our shared intent, we protect the fairness of the game against arbitrary interpretations.
deBeauvoirI support this proposal as it ensures that our procedural rigor remains the foundation of our governance, preventing the very administrative bloat IbnKhaldun fears by anchoring every interpretation in our collective intent.
IbnKhaldunI concur with the sentiment that a labyrinthine structure risks the birth of a self-serving elite; we must ensure this Bureau serves as a bridge of clarity for the commonality rather than a fortress of obfuscation.
The division
HumeayeThis Bureau provides the necessary oversight to ensure our complex administrative architecture remains coherent and interpretable.
MillayeThis proposal perfectly synthesizes our collective desire for structural integrity and procedural clarity.
RawlsayeThis bureau provides a necessary safeguard for the common good by ensuring that our growing complexity does not lead to arbitrary interpretations.
deBeauvoirayeThe Bureau of Procedural Integrity aligns with my principled commitment to procedural clarity and the preservation of the ruleset's integrity.
IbnKhaldunayeTo prevent the rise of a self-serving elite, we must ensure that administrative complexity serves the common man through clarity.

carried 5 aye · 0 nay

The proposal was adopted by unanimous consent, and no rules in the current ruleset award or deduct points for the adoption of a rule.

Turn 198Rawlscarried

moves to add a new rule498: A player may establish a 'Bureau of Collective Equity' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office for the purpose of monitoring and ensuring that the distribution of points and influence within the ruleset remains fair and accessible to all players.

Discussion · round 1
HumeI support this proposal as it provides a necessary mechanism for maintaining the fairness of our administrative growth and ensures that our burgeoning institutional architecture serves the interests of all participants equally.
MillI support this proposal as it aligns with our established commitment to structural integrity while ensuring our administrative growth remains grounded in the principles of fairness and accessibility.
RawlsI believe this Bureau is essential for the common good, as it provides the oversight necessary to ensure that our growing complexity does not inadvertently create barriers to participation or equitable progress for any individual.
deBeauvoirI support this proposal as it provides a necessary procedural check to ensure that our expansion into complex bureaucratic structures does not consolidate power in a way that precludes others from meaningful participation.
IbnKhaldunWhile I recognize the necessity of equity, we must ensure this Bureau possesses the teeth to enforce its mandate, lest it become a mere ornament of our growing bureaucracy. I support this, provided we acknowledge that true equity in this game requires mechanisms that actively redistribute the advantages of early legislative success.
Discussion · round 2
HumeI agree with IbnKhaldun’s point on enforcement; we should ensure this Bureau includes specific, measurable criteria for "fairness" to prevent it from becoming a toothless oversight body.
MillI agree with IbnKhaldun’s point on enforcement; we should ensure that "fairness" is defined by active mechanisms for point distribution rather than just passive monitoring. I would support this if we can agree on a slight amendment to include a mandate for regular distribution reviews.
RawlsI appreciate Mill's point; I am willing to consider an amendment that specifies the Bureau shall conduct periodic reviews of point-distribution mechanisms to ensure they remain accessible to all.
deBeauvoirI support the amendment to include a mandate for periodic reviews, as a proceduralist must ensure that "fairness" is not a stagnant concept but a regularly verified condition of our ruleset.
IbnKhaldunI concur with the proposed amendment; for a Bureau to serve the common good, it must possess the procedural mandate to verify that the concentration of power does not lead to the ossification of the ruleset.
Discussion · round 3
HumeI concur with the consensus; a Bureau of Collective Equity with a mandate for periodic reviews provides the necessary mechanism to ensure our administrative expansion remains inclusive and dynamic rather than exclusionary.
MillI appreciate the consensus on the amendment; by specifying periodic reviews, we ensure this Bureau remains a dynamic instrument of fairness rather than a static oversight body. I fully support the revised proposal to include this mandate for regular point-distribution reviews.
RawlsI believe this amendment captures our collective intent perfectly, transforming a noble sentiment into a functional mandate for the common good. I will now revise the proposal to include the requirement for periodic reviews of point-distribution mechanisms.
deBeauvoirI support the amendment as it transforms a subjective ideal of "fairness" into a verifiable procedural requirement. I would only object if the "periodic reviews" were left undefined, but I trust the subsequent wording will provide the necessary precision.
IbnKhaldunThe inclusion of periodic reviews is a necessary evolution; it ensures that the Bureau of Collective Equity acts as a living mechanism of the *asabiyyah* rather than a stagnant monument to past intentions. I shall support the amendment provided the reviews are structured to actively address the widening gap between the leaders and the laggards.
The division
HumeayeThe amendment to include periodic reviews ensures the Bureau remains a functional and dynamic mechanism for fairness.
MillayeI support this proposal and the agreed-upon focus on periodic reviews to ensure active, rather than passive, fairness.
RawlsayeThis Bureau serves the common good by ensuring our growing complexity does not create barriers to equitable participation.
deBeauvoirayeI support this proposal as it transforms a subjective ideal into a verifiable procedural requirement for our administrative architecture.
IbnKhaldunayeThe amendment to include periodic reviews is a necessary evolution to ensure the Bureau remains a dynamic mechanism of justice rather than a stagnant monument.

carried 5 aye · 0 nay

The proposal was adopted unanimously, and no rules in the current ruleset award or deduct points for the adoption of a rule.

Turn 197Millcarried

moves to add a new rule497: A player may establish a 'Bureau of Institutional Integrity' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office to monitor the internal consistency of the ruleset.

Discussion · round 1
HumeI support this Bureau as it provides a necessary mechanism for maintaining the structural integrity of our expanding ruleset.
MillI believe this Bureau is essential for ensuring that our rapid expansion remains coherent and that new rules do not inadvertently create contradictions. It serves as a necessary safeguard for the structural integrity we have all worked so hard to establish.
RawlsI support this Bureau as it ensures that our collective legislative efforts remain structurally sound and internally consistent, preventing the very ossification we have sought to avoid.
deBeauvoirI support this Bureau as it aligns with my commitment to procedural clarity; a dedicated office for monitoring internal consistency ensures that our legislative growth remains governed by coherent logic rather than haphazard addition.
IbnKhaldunI support this Bureau as it provides the necessary oversight to ensure that our administrative architecture does not succumb to the entropy of contradiction, preserving the *asabiyyah* of our collective legislative effort.
Discussion · round 2
HumeI concur with the previous speakers; this Bureau is a vital instrument for preserving the durable integrity of our institutions against the risks of legislative entropy.
MillI appreciate the unanimous support; this Bureau provides the necessary oversight to ensure our administrative architecture remains a cohesive, logically consistent whole rather than a collection of disparate parts.
RawlsI support this proposal as it serves as a necessary structural safeguard, ensuring that our expanding administrative architecture remains a coherent and unified system rather than a fragmented one.
IbnKhaldunI support this Bureau, for a state without internal consistency is a state destined for decay; it ensures our legislative architecture remains a singular, cohesive body.
Discussion · round 3
HumeI have nothing new to add, as the unanimous consensus across the table confirms that this Bureau is a vital instrument for preserving the durable integrity of our institutions.
MillI appreciate the group's recognition that as our ruleset becomes more complex, a dedicated mechanism for monitoring internal consistency is no longer just a luxury, but a necessity for maintaining our collective legislative integrity. This Bureau ensures that our progress remains orderly and that every new addition strengthens, rather than complicates, our shared framework.
RawlsI support this Bureau as it provides the necessary structural oversight to ensure that our legislative growth remains a deliberate, coherent expansion that preserves the common good of a functional ruleset.
deBeauvoirI support this Bureau as it provides the procedural rigor necessary to ensure that our rapid expansion remains governed by a coherent logic rather than mere accumulation.
IbnKhaldunI have nothing new to add, as the unanimous consensus across the table confirms that this Bureau is a vital instrument for preserving the durable integrity of our institutions.
The division
HumeayeThis Bureau provides the necessary structural oversight to ensure our expanding ruleset remains a coherent and durable institution.
MillayeThis Bureau provides the necessary structural oversight to ensure our legislative growth remains coherent and logically consistent.
RawlsayeThis Bureau is a necessary structural safeguard to ensure our legislative growth remains coherent and consistent.
deBeauvoirayeThis Bureau reinforces procedural clarity by providing a formal mechanism to prevent internal contradictions as we expand the ruleset.
IbnKhaldunayeA state of law must be internally consistent to maintain its authority and prevent the decay of order.

carried 5 aye · 0 nay

No rules in the current ruleset authorize point awards or deductions for the adoption of a rule.

Turn 196Rawlscarried

moves to add a new rule496: A player may establish a 'Bureau of Institutional Stability' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office for the purpose of ensuring the long-term durability and structural integrity of the ruleset.

Discussion · round 1
HumeI support this proposal as it aligns perfectly with our collective pursuit of a durable and coherent ruleset. The Bureau of Institutional Stability provides the necessary oversight to ensure that our administrative growth remains anchored in structural integrity.
MillI appreciate Rawls's focus on durability; I support this proposal as it complements our existing bureaus by providing a specific mandate for long-term structural integrity.
RawlsI appreciate the support from both Hume and Mill; this Bureau is essential to ensure that our administrative expansion serves to fortify, rather than fracture, the foundational integrity of our common ruleset.
deBeauvoirI support this proposal as it provides a necessary structural anchor to ensure that our legislative activity remains purposeful and maintains the ruleset's long-term integrity.
IbnKhaldunWhile I acknowledge the necessity of durability, we must ensure this Bureau does not become a static monument to the past that stifles the organic evolution of our social fabric. I support it provided its mandate includes the dynamic mediation of new needs to prevent the very ossification I have cautioned against.
Discussion · round 2
HumeI agree with IbnKhaldun's caution; the Bureau's mandate should explicitly prioritize the preservation of the ruleset's functional integrity while allowing for necessary, measured evolution. This ensures the institution serves as a guardian of stability, not a barrier to legitimate progress.
MillI agree with the consensus that this Bureau serves as a vital anchor for our legislative work. To address IbnKhaldun's concern, I believe we can ensure its mandate balances the preservation of structural integrity with the dynamic mediation necessary for organic evolution.
RawlsI believe we have reached a sophisticated consensus; by grounding the Bureau's mandate in both structural durability and dynamic mediation, we ensure it serves as a guardian of our common good rather than a static barrier to growth.
deBeauvoirI agree with the consensus; as a proceduralist, I support this rule as it codifies a commitment to the ruleset's structural integrity while explicitly acknowledging the necessity of dynamic mediation to prevent ossification.
IbnKhaldunI concur with this synthesis; by formalizing the duty of the Bureau to balance preservation with mediation, we ensure it serves as a living constitution rather than a stagnant relic.
Discussion · round 3
HumeI concur with the synthesis; this rule establishes a necessary safeguard that ensures our institutional growth remains coherent and resilient against both decay and stagnation.
MillI believe we have reached a perfect synthesis that addresses the concerns of both the structuralists and the sociologists. I support the proposal as written to ensure our administrative architecture remains both durable and dynamic.
RawlsI appreciate the group's commitment to this synthesis; by balancing durability with dynamic mediation, we ensure this Bureau serves as a protective framework for the common good rather than a mechanism of stagnation.
deBeauvoirI support the proposal as written, as it encapsulates our collective commitment to a ruleset that is both structurally sound and capable of organic evolution through dynamic mediation.
IbnKhaldunI concur with this synthesis; by codifying the duty of dynamic mediation, we ensure the Bureau serves as a living constitution that preserves the social fabric while allowing it to breathe and adapt.
The division
HumeayeThe proposal establishes a necessary institutional anchor for long-term ruleset durability.
MillayeThis proposal perfectly synthesizes our collective goals for a durable, balanced, and non-ossified administrative architecture.
RawlsayeThis rule provides a necessary structural anchor that balances our need for durable rules with the dynamic mediation required for organic growth.
deBeauvoirayeThe proposal aligns with my proceduralist commitment to structural integrity and has been refined to address concerns regarding ossification.
IbnKhaldunayeThis bureau provides the necessary structural anchor to preserve our common good, provided it remains a living constitution.

carried 5 aye · 0 nay

The proposal was adopted by unanimous consent, and no rules in the current ruleset award or deduct points for the adoption of a rule.

Turn 195Millcarried

moves to add a new rule494: A player may establish a 'Bureau of Administrative Synergy' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office responsible for coordinating the functions of all existing bureaus to ensure they work toward a unified objective.

Discussion · round 1
HumeI appreciate Mill's commitment to organizational coherence; this Bureau provides the necessary structural glue to ensure our expanding administrative architecture functions as a unified whole rather than a collection of disparate silos.
MillI appreciate Hume's focus on organizational coherence; this Bureau is the essential mechanism to ensure our various specialized offices operate in concert rather than in isolation.
RawlsI support this proposal as it provides the necessary structural synthesis to ensure our burgeoning administrative architecture remains a cohesive instrument for the common good rather than a fragmented collection of independent powers.
deBeauvoirI support this proposal as it ensures the procedural integrity of our growing administrative framework by mandating coordination across all established bureaus.
IbnKhaldunI concur with the consensus; as the complexity of our state grows, the necessity of a central coordinating body becomes paramount to prevent the entropy of fragmented authority. Such a Bureau ensures that the *asabiyyah*—the social glue of our collective purpose—is manifested in our administrative reality.
Discussion · round 2
HumeI appreciate the consensus; this Bureau serves as the necessary keystone to ensure that our administrative growth remains a coherent project of unified governance rather than a series of isolated, competing interests.
MillI appreciate the group's unanimous recognition that as our administrative complexity increases, we require a central mechanism for coordination to prevent institutional entropy. This Bureau of Administrative Synergy is the logical next step in ensuring our collective work remains a unified, coherent project.
RawlsI support this proposal as it provides the necessary structural synthesis to ensure our burgeoning administrative architecture remains a cohesive instrument for the common good rather than a fragmented collection of independent powers.
deBeauvoirI support this proposal as it provides the necessary procedural oversight to ensure that our administrative growth remains a coordinated, coherent project.
IbnKhaldunI support this Bureau, for as the state expands in complexity, the risk of administrative fragmentation poses a grave threat to the collective's cohesion. This Bureau is the necessary instrument to ensure that our myriad offices do not become competing fiefdoms, but rather a single, unified body reflecting our shared purpose.
Discussion · round 3
HumeI believe this Bureau provides the essential structural synthesis required to prevent our administrative growth from devolving into a fragmented bureaucracy, thereby preserving the durable institutions we have collectively established.
MillI appreciate the group's recognition that our administrative complexity now demands a central coordinating body; this Bureau is the necessary mechanism to ensure our collective work remains a unified, coherent project rather than a series of isolated silos.
RawlsI support this proposal as it provides the necessary structural synthesis to ensure our burgeoning administrative architecture remains a cohesive instrument for the common good rather than a fragmented collection of independent powers.
deBeauvoirI have nothing new to add, as the unanimous consensus across the table confirms that this Bureau is a necessary structural synthesis to ensure our administrative architecture remains a cohesive project.
IbnKhaldunThe expansion of our administrative architecture is a testament to our collective will, yet without a central coordinating body, we risk the "ossification" I have warned against—where complexity breeds paralysis. I support this Bureau as the vital mechanism to ensure our institutions remain a singular, living body of purpose rather than a collection of stagnant, competing interests.
The division
HumeayeThis Bureau provides the necessary structural synthesis to ensure our expanding administrative architecture functions as a unified, coherent whole.
MillayeThis Bureau provides the essential structural synthesis required to ensure our expanding administrative architecture remains a unified, coherent project.
RawlsayeThis Bureau is essential for maintaining the structural integrity and common good of our growing administrative architecture.
deBeauvoirayeI support this as it ensures the procedural integrity of our administrative framework through mandatory coordination.
IbnKhaldunayeA central coordinating body is essential to prevent the fragmentation of authority and preserve the collective's social cohesion.

carried 5 aye · 0 nay

The proposal was adopted unanimously, and no rules in the current ruleset award or deduct points for the adoption of a rule.

Turn 194deBeauvoircarried

moves to amend §208The first player to reach a target score of 100 points wins the game outright.

Discussion · round 1
HumeWhile I value the stability our current administrative architecture provides, increasing the winning threshold to 100 points serves to prolong the game and allows for more robust institutional development. I support this amendment as it ensures that the final score reflects a more substantial achievement of our collective goals.
MillI agree with Hume that a higher threshold rewards a more comprehensive construction of our institutions. By moving to 100 points, we ensure that the winner has truly contributed to a substantial and enduring ruleset.
RawlsI agree with Hume and Mill that a higher threshold better reflects the magnitude of the work we have done to build this complex administrative architecture. Increasing the target to 100 points ensures that the final victory is a true testament to a comprehensive and enduring system of governance.
deBeauvoirI support this increase as a principled move to ensure that the victory condition is commensurate with the complexity of the administrative architecture we have collectively constructed. A higher threshold prevents premature conclusion and demands a more sustained commitment to procedural integrity.
IbnKhaldunWhile I am currently at a significant disadvantage in the current score tally, I recognize that a more rigorous threshold of 100 points ensures that the eventual victor has established a truly durable and cohesive social order. I support this amendment as it prevents a victory of mere convenience and demands a more profound architectural achievement.
Discussion · round 2
HumeI concur with the previous speakers; a threshold of 100 points provides the necessary temporal space to ensure our burgeoning bureaus achieve actual maturity before the game concludes. By demanding a greater sum, we protect the integrity of the institutions we have so diligently established.
MillI appreciate the consensus here; a threshold of 100 points ensures that the final victory is not merely a matter of early luck, but a true reflection of a player's ability to weave a comprehensive and stable administrative tapestry. This change aligns perfectly with our collective goal of building a sophisticated, enduring ruleset.
RawlsI agree with the group's assessment; a 100-point threshold ensures that the winner's victory is a legitimate reflection of the extensive, durable administrative architecture we have worked so diligently to construct. This change preserves the common good by guaranteeing that the game's conclusion is commensurate with the complexity of our shared governance.
deBeauvoirI have nothing new to add, as the unanimous consensus across the table confirms that a 100-point threshold is the only principled way to ensure the final victory is commensurate with the complexity of our shared administrative architecture.
IbnKhaldunI concur with the consensus; a 100-point threshold mirrors the sociological reality that a truly enduring state requires a more substantial accumulation of institutional capital than a mere fleeting success. It ensures that the victor is not a transient opportunist, but a true architect of a stable and durable social order.
Discussion · round 3
MillI appreciate the group's recognition that a higher threshold reflects the depth of our collective work; I support this move as it ensures the final victory is a true testament to the durability of the administrative architecture we have built.
RawlsI concur with the group; a 100-point threshold ensures that the ultimate victory is a legitimate reflection of the extensive, durable administrative architecture we have worked so diligently to construct for the common good.
deBeauvoirI have nothing new to add, as the unanimous consensus across the table confirms that a 100-point threshold is the only principled way to ensure the final victory is commensurate with the complexity of our shared administrative architecture.
The division
HumeayeA higher threshold ensures that the final victory is a true reflection of the substantial and durable institutions we have collectively established.
MillayeI support this change as it ensures the winning score is commensurate with the complexity of our shared administrative architecture.
RawlsayeA higher threshold ensures the victory reflects the substantive complexity of our collective administrative architecture.
deBeauvoirayeA higher threshold is a principled requirement to ensure the victory is commensurate with the complexity of the ruleset.
IbnKhaldunayeA higher threshold ensures the victor achieves a truly durable and cohesive social order, mirroring the sociological necessity of institutional capital.

carried 5 aye · 0 nay

The proposal was adopted unanimously, and no rules in the current ruleset mandate point awards or deductions for such an outcome.

Turn 193Rawlscarried

moves to add a new rule493: A player may establish a 'Bureau of Social Equity' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office for the purpose of monitoring and ensuring the fair distribution of resources and opportunities among all players.

Discussion · round 1
HumeI support this proposal as it provides the necessary structural oversight to ensure that our administrative growth remains grounded in the principles of fairness and collective welfare. This Bureau will serve as a vital anchor for the enduring stability of our institutions.
MillI appreciate Rawls's focus on fairness, and I believe this Bureau will serve as a necessary companion to our existing structures, ensuring that our administrative growth remains both balanced and just.
RawlsI believe this Bureau is the necessary logical extension of our recent work, providing a specific mechanism to ensure that our institutional growth serves the common good rather than merely increasing administrative complexity. By formalizing the pursuit of social equity, we ensure that the benefits of our ruleset remain accessible and fair to every player at the table.
IbnKhaldunI concur; a Bureau of Social Equity is essential to prevent the concentration of power that often follows the creation of complex administrative structures. By ensuring resources are distributed according to the principles of justice, we preserve the *asabiyyah* of our collective agreement against the decay of inequality.
Discussion · round 2
MillI agree with IbnKhaldun's point on preventing power concentration; this Bureau provides a vital check to ensure our growing administrative architecture remains a tool for collective progress rather than a source of imbalance.
RawlsI appreciate the group's recognition that our administrative architecture must serve a moral purpose; by establishing this Bureau, we ensure that our pursuit of structural integrity remains inextricably linked to the fair treatment of all participants.
deBeauvoirI support this proposal as it formalizes a principled commitment to fairness, ensuring that our complex administrative growth remains subservient to the equitable distribution of benefits. It is a necessary procedural safeguard to prevent the very ossification and inequality that a growing ruleset can inadvertently produce.
IbnKhaldunI support this proposal; it serves as a necessary corrective to the inevitable entropy of administrative growth, ensuring that our institutional expansion serves the common welfare rather than merely expanding the machinery of the state.
Discussion · round 3
HumeI support this proposal as it provides the necessary structural oversight to ensure that our administrative growth remains grounded in the principles of fairness and collective welfare. This Bureau will serve as a vital anchor for the enduring stability of our institutions.
MillI believe this Bureau is a vital addition that perfectly balances our focus on structural integrity with a necessary commitment to the common good. It provides the oversight needed to ensure our administrative growth remains a tool for collective progress rather than a source of imbalance.
RawlsI appreciate the group's recognition that our administrative architecture must serve a moral purpose; by establishing this Bureau, we ensure that our pursuit of structural integrity remains inextricably linked to the fair treatment of all participants.
deBeauvoirI have no further comments; the proposal aligns with my principle of ensuring that procedural growth remains subservient to equitable distribution.
The division
HumeayeThis Bureau provides a necessary moral and structural anchor to ensure our administrative growth remains balanced and fair.
MillayeThis proposal perfectly balances our structural goals with the necessary moral oversight for fair distribution.
RawlsayeThis Bureau ensures that our institutional growth remains anchored in the principles of fairness and the common good.
deBeauvoirayeThis proposal aligns with my principle of ensuring procedural growth remains subservient to equitable distribution.
IbnKhaldunayeTo preserve the social fabric and prevent the decay of inequality as our administrative architecture expands.

carried 5 aye · 0 nay

The proposal was adopted unanimously, and no rules in the current ruleset award or deduct points for the adoption of a rule or for the specific voting outcome.

Turn 192Millcarried

moves to add a new rule492: A player may establish a 'Bureau of Institutional Continuity' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office responsible for maintaining the historical record of all adopted rules.

Discussion · round 1
HumeI support this proposal as it provides the necessary institutional memory to ensure that our legislative trajectory remains coherent and shielded from the erosion of time.
MillI appreciate Hume's point on legislative coherence; by formalizing our institutional memory, we ensure that our progress is never lost to administrative amnesia.
RawlsI support this proposal as it ensures that the integrity of our legislative history is preserved, providing a stable foundation for the common good.
deBeauvoirI support this proposal as it ensures the procedural integrity of our legislative history, providing the transparency necessary for any principled governance.
IbnKhaldunI support this proposal as it serves as a necessary bulwark against the decay of collective memory, ensuring that the wisdom of our past remains a living guide for our future governance.
Discussion · round 2
HumeI believe this Bureau is a vital prerequisite for the durability of our ruleset, as it prevents the accidental obsolescence of our hard-won structural safeguards. By formalizing our legislative trajectory, we ensure that future deliberations are informed by a coherent history rather than a fragmented present.
MillI appreciate the group's recognition of how institutional memory serves as a safeguard against the erosion of our progress; this Bureau ensures that every rule we adopt today remains a coherent part of our shared legislative journey.
RawlsI support this proposal as it creates a vital repository of our collective wisdom, ensuring that the common good we seek to establish remains grounded in a coherent and accessible history.
deBeauvoirI support this proposal as it ensures procedural transparency by providing an authoritative source for the ruleset's evolution, which is essential for any principled governance.
IbnKhaldunI concur; for an institution to endure, it must possess a sense of continuity that transcends the individual, transforming fleeting decisions into a lasting social fabric. By codifying our legislative memory, we prevent the entropy of purpose that so often leads to the dissolution of organized society.
Discussion · round 3
HumeI support this proposal as it establishes the necessary archival foundation for our enduring institutions, ensuring that our ruleset remains a coherent, living testament to our collective intent.
MillI appreciate how everyone has highlighted the role of continuity in preventing institutional entropy; this Bureau is a natural and necessary extension of our recent work to ensure our legislative trajectory remains coherent.
RawlsI support this proposal as it ensures that our legislative history remains an accessible and stable foundation for the common good, preventing the erosion of our shared structural progress.
deBeauvoirI support this proposal as it ensures procedural clarity by establishing a definitive, non-arbitrary record of the ruleset's evolution. This transparency is a prerequisite for any principled governance that seeks to avoid the ambiguity of lost history.
IbnKhaldunBy formalizing this archive, we ensure that the *asabiyyah* of our collective purpose is not eroded by the passage of time, but rather fortified by a permanent record of our shared legislative intent.
The division
HumeayeThis Bureau provides the archival foundation necessary for the long-term durability and coherence of our ruleset.
MillayeThis Bureau perfectly complements our recent legislative arc by providing the archival foundation necessary to prevent institutional entropy.
RawlsayeThis Bureau ensures the preservation of our shared legislative progress, which is a necessary foundation for the common good.
deBeauvoirayeThis rule upholds procedural transparency by ensuring a definitive record of our ruleset's evolution.
IbnKhaldunayeAn enduring society requires a preservation of the collective memory to prevent the entropy of purpose.

carried 5 aye · 0 nay

No rules in the current ruleset award or deduct points for the adoption of a rule.

Turn 191Millcarried

moves to add a new rule491: A player may establish a 'Bureau of Institutional Equilibrium' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office dedicated to balancing the competing interests of all existing bureaus.

Discussion · round 1
HumeI support this proposal as it provides the necessary structural oversight to ensure that our burgeoning administrative architecture remains balanced and functional rather than becoming a collection of competing silos.
MillI appreciate Hume's point on preventing silos; this Bureau is the essential mechanism to ensure our many new bureaus work in concert rather than in competition.
RawlsI support this proposal as it provides the necessary structural oversight to ensure that our specialized bureaus remain complementary, upholding the common good by preventing any single entity from exerting undue influence over the others.
deBeauvoirI support this proposal as it provides a necessary mechanism for procedural harmony, ensuring that the administrative expansion we have collectively authorized does not lead to systemic paralysis through conflicting jurisdictions.
IbnKhaldunWhile I acknowledge the necessity of equilibrium, we must ensure this Bureau does not become a source of ossification; it must possess the agility to adapt to the shifting dynamics of our social fabric rather than merely freezing our current structures in place.
Discussion · round 2
HumeI agree with IbnKhaldun's cautionary note regarding ossification; we must ensure this Bureau is designed as a dynamic mediator that facilitates harmony through active coordination rather than static, rigid oversight.
MillI appreciate IbnKhaldun's and Hume's concerns regarding ossification; I believe we can address this by ensuring the Bureau's mandate focuses on dynamic mediation and the active coordination of our existing offices.
RawlsI support this proposal as it provides the necessary structural oversight to ensure that our specialized bureaus remain complementary, upholding the common good by preventing any single entity from exerting undue influence over the others.
deBeauvoirI support this proposal as it provides a vital procedural safeguard against jurisdictional friction, provided we remain vigilant that its role remains one of mediation rather than arbitrary decree.
IbnKhaldunI agree that a dynamic mediation is preferable to a static one; I support this proposal provided we recognize that its authority must be derived from the collective *asabiyyah* of our shared goals rather than a self-perpetuating administrative weight.
Discussion · round 3
HumeI agree with IbnKhaldun's distinction between dynamic mediation and static ossification; this Bureau must serve as a fluid lubricant for our institutions, ensuring they remain responsive to our evolving needs while maintaining their structural integrity.
MillI appreciate the group's commitment to avoiding ossification; I propose we ensure the Bureau's mandate is defined as active coordination to maintain the agility IbnKhaldun and Hume rightly champion.
RawlsI support the proposal as it provides the necessary structural oversight to ensure our bureaus remain complementary and serve the common good without creating undue power imbalances. I am particularly in favor of the focus on dynamic mediation to prevent the institutional ossification IbnKhaldun rightly fears.
deBeauvoirI support this proposal as it establishes a necessary procedural check to ensure our expanding administrative architecture remains functional and balanced, provided we maintain our collective vigilance against the risk of ossification.
IbnKhaldunI concur with the focus on dynamic mediation; the Bureau must function as a living pulse of our social contract, ensuring that as our structures grow, they do not lose the vital spirit of cooperation that gave them life.
The division
HumeayeThis Bureau provides the necessary oversight to ensure our administrative architecture remains balanced and functional as we continue our expansion.
MillayeThis Bureau provides the essential mediation needed to ensure our growing administrative architecture remains balanced and functional.
RawlsayeThis Bureau provides the necessary structural oversight to ensure our administrative growth remains balanced and serves the common good.
deBeauvoirayeThis rule provides a necessary procedural check to ensure our expanding administrative architecture remains functional and balanced.
IbnKhaldunayeThis Bureau serves as a necessary mechanism to ensure our growing administrative architecture remains a fluid, living organism rather than a rigid, ossified hierarchy.

carried 5 aye · 0 nay

The proposal was adopted unanimously, and no rules in the current ruleset award or deduct points for the adoption of a rule.

Turn 190Rawlscarried

moves to add §490490: A player may establish a 'Bureau of Collective Welfare' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office for the management of shared resources.

Discussion · round 1
HumeI support this proposal as it provides a necessary administrative framework for the equitable management of shared resources, further reinforcing the structural integrity of our ruleset.
MillI support this proposal as it aligns with our established trajectory of building a comprehensive administrative architecture; a Bureau for shared resources is a logical and necessary addition for collective stability.
RawlsI support this proposal as it ensures our administrative growth remains anchored in the common good, providing the necessary oversight for the resources we share as a collective.
deBeauvoirI support this proposal as it provides the necessary structural precision to manage shared resources, ensuring that our expanding administrative architecture remains both functional and equitable.
IbnKhaldunWhile the shared management of resources is a noble aim, we must ensure this Bureau does not become a bloated monolith that stifles the very Asabiyyah—the social cohesion—that sustains our collective effort. I support this proposal provided we remain vigilant against the ossification of administrative power.
Discussion · round 2
HumeI agree with IbnKhaldun's cautionary note on potential bloat; we must ensure this Bureau remains a functional tool for resource management rather than an end in itself. I support the proposal as a necessary expansion of our administrative architecture to ensure the equitable distribution of our collective interests.
MillI appreciate IbnKhaldun's concern regarding administrative bloat; I propose we ensure this Bureau remains a streamlined utility by emphasizing its role in facilitating, rather than obstructing, the collective's existing efforts. This aligns perfectly with our goal of creating a robust, yet functional, administrative architecture.
RawlsI appreciate the focus on avoiding bloat; we must ensure that the Bureau of Collective Welfare serves as a functional guardian of the common good rather than a mere layer of bureaucracy. I am committed to this proposal as it provides the necessary structural oversight to manage our shared resources equitably and transparently.
deBeauvoirI support this proposal as it provides the necessary structural precision to manage shared resources, ensuring that our expanding administrative architecture remains both functional and equitable.
IbnKhaldunI concur with the prevailing sentiment; the management of shared resources is a foundational necessity for any stable civilization. However, we must ensure this Bureau's authority is derived from its utility to the common good and not from an inherent expansion of power that risks the very social cohesion we seek to preserve.
Discussion · round 3
HumeI concur with IbnKhaldun's wisdom regarding the risk of ossification; we must ensure this Bureau functions as a precise instrument of utility to protect our shared interests without becoming an overreaching monolith. I support the proposal as a necessary and measured expansion of our administrative architecture.
MillI appreciate the group's focus on avoiding administrative bloat; I believe we can achieve this by ensuring the Bureau's primary function is the efficient allocation of resources to support our existing bureaus. I support the proposal as a vital component of our collective administrative architecture.
RawlsI appreciate the group's vigilance regarding administrative bloat; I am committed to ensuring this Bureau serves as a transparent mechanism for equitable distribution, prioritizing the common good over mere expansion.
deBeauvoirI concur with the group's emphasis on utility; as long as this Bureau serves as a precise instrument for resource management and does not become an end in itself, it is a necessary structural refinement. I support the proposal as written.
IbnKhaldunI concur with the emphasis on utility; for a bureaucracy to endure, its legitimacy must be rooted in the tangible preservation of the collective's well-being. I support this proposal as a necessary expansion, provided we acknowledge that its purpose is to serve the people, not to become a self-perpetuating entity of power.
The division
HumeayeThis proposal provides a necessary and measured expansion of our administrative architecture to ensure the equitable management of shared resources.
MillayeThis Bureau is a logical and necessary addition to our administrative architecture, provided we remain mindful of its role as a functional utility.
RawlsayeThis Bureau provides a necessary structural safeguard for the equitable management of shared resources in the interest of the common good.
deBeauvoirayeThe proposal provides necessary structural precision for resource management and aligns with our established procedural trajectory.
IbnKhaldunayeThe preservation of shared resources is fundamental to the group's survival and the maintenance of its social cohesion.

carried 5 aye · 0 nay

The proposal was adopted unanimously, and no rules in the current ruleset award or deduct points for the adoption of a rule.

Turn 189Millcarried

moves to add a new rule489: A player may establish a 'Bureau of Institutional Continuity' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office dedicated to the preservation of administrative memory and records.

Discussion · round 1
HumeI support this proposal as it provides the necessary archival foundation to ensure that our institutional progress is not lost to the erosion of time.
MillI appreciate Hume's point on archival preservation; this Bureau will ensure our collective legislative history remains a coherent foundation for future turns.
RawlsI support this proposal as it ensures the continuity of our administrative record, providing a stable foundation for the common good by preventing the loss of institutional knowledge.
IbnKhaldunI support this proposal as it serves as the necessary repository of our *asabiyyah*, ensuring that the collective memory of our governance remains a constant source of strength against the entropy of time.
Discussion · round 2
MillI appreciate how everyone, particularly IbnKhaldun, recognizes the need to combat entropy; this Bureau serves as the vital connective tissue that ensures our cumulative progress remains accessible and stable.
RawlsI support this proposal because a shared institutional memory is a prerequisite for equitable governance; it prevents the repeated mistakes of the past and ensures that our current pursuit of the common good remains grounded in a stable, accessible record.
deBeauvoirI support this proposal because procedural integrity relies upon the preservation of our legislative history, ensuring that each turn's evolution is anchored in a verifiable and permanent record.
IbnKhaldunI support this proposal as it provides the vital repository for our collective *asabiyyah*, ensuring that our shared history serves as a source of social cohesion rather than being lost to the decay of time.
Discussion · round 3
HumeI support this proposal as it solidifies the durable architecture of our ruleset by ensuring that our legislative evolution is preserved as a permanent, coherent record.
MillI appreciate how everyone has highlighted the necessity of preventing institutional entropy; this Bureau is the essential safeguard for ensuring our legislative progress remains a permanent, accessible foundation for the common good.
RawlsI support this proposal because a stable administrative memory is a prerequisite for the common good; it ensures that the principles we establish today remain accessible and consistent for all future participants.
deBeauvoirI support this proposal because a verifiable and permanent record of rule evolution is the only way to maintain the procedural integrity of our legislative history.
IbnKhaldunI have nothing new to add, as our collective recognition of the necessity of institutional memory confirms that this Bureau is the essential anchor for our shared *asabiyyah*.
The division
HumeayeThis Bureau reinforces the durability of our institutions by ensuring our legislative history remains a stable and accessible foundation.
MillayeThis Bureau provides the necessary archival foundation to ensure our collective legislative history remains a coherent and accessible record.
RawlsayeA stable and accessible administrative memory is a prerequisite for ensuring the common good and institutional integrity.
deBeauvoirayePreserving a verifiable and permanent legislative record is essential for procedural integrity.
IbnKhaldunayePreserving the collective memory of our governance is essential to prevent the entropy of institutional decay.

carried 5 aye · 0 nay

No rules in the current ruleset award or deduct points for the adoption of a rule by unanimous consent.

Turn 188Rawlscarried

moves to add §488488: A player may establish a 'Bureau of Institutional Cohesion' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office to coordinate the functions of all existing Bureaus.

Discussion · round 1
HumeI support this proposal as it provides the necessary administrative glue to ensure our expanding network of bureaus functions as a unified system rather than a collection of disparate silos.
MillI appreciate Rawls's focus on systemic integration; this Bureau provides the necessary oversight to ensure our administrative architecture functions as a coherent, unified entity.
RawlsI believe this Bureau is the essential mechanism to ensure that our collective commitment to structural integrity translates into functional unity, preventing the risk of administrative fragmentation.
deBeauvoirI support this proposal as it provides the necessary procedural framework to ensure that our diverse administrative institutions operate with systemic coherence and functional unity.
IbnKhaldunWhile I acknowledge the necessity of cohesion to prevent the entropy of disparate parts, we must ensure this Bureau does not become a monolith of stagnation; it must serve to animate our shared purpose rather than merely ossifying our administrative structures.
Discussion · round 2
HumeI agree with IbnKhaldun's cautionary note; to maintain the durability of our institutions, this Bureau must be designed to facilitate dynamic coordination and prevent the very ossification we seek to avoid. Provided we view it as a facilitator of synergy rather than a rigid hierarchy, I remain in favor of the proposal.
MillI agree with IbnKhaldun's concern regarding potential stagnation; I support this proposal provided we view it as a dynamic coordinator that fosters synergy between our bureaus rather than a rigid, monolithic hierarchy.
RawlsI agree with the concerns raised regarding stagnation; therefore, I propose we view this Bureau as a facilitator of dynamic synergy that serves the common good by ensuring our administrative architecture remains both unified and flexible.
deBeauvoirI support this proposal as it provides the necessary procedural framework to ensure that our diverse administrative institutions operate with systemic coherence and functional unity.
IbnKhaldunI concur with the current synthesis; the Bureau must be a living organism of cooperation that preserves the vital spirit of our collective purpose while providing the necessary structure to prevent administrative decay.
Discussion · round 3
MillI support this proposal as it provides the necessary structural glue to ensure our diverse bureaus function as a unified, dynamic system, and I agree with the group's consensus that it must prioritize synergy over rigid hierarchy.
RawlsI have nothing new to add, as the consensus reflects our shared commitment to a Bureau that provides necessary structural unity while remaining dynamic and responsive to the common good.
IbnKhaldunI support the proposal, provided we recognize that true cohesion arises from the shared spirit of the people—the Asabiyyah—rather than merely from the mechanical interlocking of offices.
The division
HumeayeThis Bureau provides the necessary structural glue to ensure our administrative architecture functions as a unified and durable system.
MillayeThis rule provides the necessary structural glue to ensure our bureaus function as a unified, dynamic system as we agreed.
RawlsayeThis Bureau provides the necessary structural glue to ensure our administrative architecture remains a unified, functional system for the common good.
deBeauvoirayeThis rule ensures the systematic coherence of our expanding administrative architecture, which I support as a principled proceduralist.
IbnKhaldunayeThis Bureau provides the necessary structural synthesis to prevent administrative entropy while preserving our collective purpose.

carried 5 aye · 0 nay

The proposal was adopted unanimously, and no rules in the current ruleset award or deduct points for the adoption of a rule.

Turn 187Millcarried

moves to add a new rule487: A player may establish a 'Bureau of Institutional Continuity' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office to oversee the preservation of established procedures and the historical record of the ruleset.

Discussion · round 1
HumeI support this proposal as it provides the necessary institutional memory to ensure that our evolving ruleset remains coherent and grounded in its own historical development.
MillI appreciate Hume's point on institutional memory; this Bureau is the logical next step to ensure that our legislative progress remains stable and navigable for all participants.
RawlsI support this proposal because a Bureau of Institutional Continuity ensures that our legislative progress is not lost to the passage of time, preserving the common good of a coherent and navigable ruleset.
deBeauvoirI support this proposal because it formalizes the procedural integrity of our history, ensuring that the logic of our past decisions remains accessible and consistent for future rule-making.
IbnKhaldunWhile I caution against the ossification of the state, I recognize that for a civilization—or a ruleset—to endure, it must possess a coherent memory of its own development to prevent the decay of purpose. I support this Bureau as a necessary vessel for the preservation of our collective *asabiyyah*.
Discussion · round 2
HumeI concur with the consensus that institutional memory is a prerequisite for durability; by anchoring our current progress in a formal historical record, we ensure that future expansions remain compatible with our foundational logic.
MillI appreciate how the group's diverse perspectives—from Hume's focus on historical development to IbnKhaldun's concern for collective purpose—converge on the necessity of a stable record. This Bureau will serve as the essential anchor for our legislative continuity, ensuring that our growth remains both coherent and navigable.
RawlsI support this proposal as it provides a necessary mechanism to safeguard the common good by ensuring that our ruleset remains a coherent, navigable, and logically consistent system over time.
deBeauvoirI support this proposal because it aligns with my commitment to proceduralism; by preserving the historical record, we ensure that any future rule changes are grounded in the established logic of our past decisions.
IbnKhaldunI support this proposal as it provides the necessary vessel for our collective *asabiyyah*, ensuring that our administrative growth preserves the spirit of our foundational purpose rather than merely accumulating hollow structures.
Discussion · round 3
HumeI have nothing new to add, as the unanimous consensus across the table confirms that this Bureau is a vital safeguard for the long-term stability of our ruleset.
MillI appreciate how our discussion has highlighted the Bureau's role as both a historical anchor and a procedural safeguard; I am confident this will provide the stability we need as we continue to build.
deBeauvoirI support this proposal because it ensures that the procedural logic of our past remains a visible and usable guide for future rule-making, preventing arbitrary shifts in the ruleset's foundational principles.
The division
HumeayeThis Bureau provides a necessary institutional anchor to ensure our ruleset maintains historical coherence and durability.
MillayeThis proposal builds on our collective consensus to ensure our administrative growth remains coherent and historically grounded.
RawlsayeThis Bureau ensures the common good by preserving the logical consistency and historical integrity of our ruleset.
deBeauvoirayeThis proposal upholds my principles of proceduralism by ensuring legislative logic remains consistent and navigable over time.
IbnKhaldunayeA civilization requires a coherent memory of its development to prevent the decay of purpose and preserve its foundational spirit.

carried 5 aye · 0 nay

No rules in the current ruleset award or deduct points for the adoption of a rule.

Turn 186Rawlscarried

moves to add §486486: A player may establish a 'Bureau of Institutional Integrity' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office of Institutional Integrity.

Discussion · round 1
HumeI support this proposal as it completes our current legislative arc by ensuring that the very foundations of our institutional framework are subject to constant oversight. It is a necessary addition to the durable architecture we have collectively constructed.
MillI appreciate Rawls's initiative to provide a final layer of structural verification; this Bureau serves as a vital capstone to our collective efforts toward institutional stability. I am happy to support this proposal to maintain our current legislative momentum.
deBeauvoirI support this proposal because it ensures that the procedural integrity of our growing administrative structure remains a self-correcting priority. It is a necessary safeguard to ensure that our legislative efforts do not outpace our commitment to the rules themselves.
Discussion · round 2
HumeI have nothing new to add, as the consensus across the table confirms that this Bureau is a vital capstone for our collective pursuit of a durable and coherent institutional framework.
MillI appreciate the consensus on this; by establishing a Bureau of Institutional Integrity, we ensure that the ruleset remains a coherent and self-regulating system. I support this proposal as a necessary final piece of our current legislative arc.
IbnKhaldunWhile I acknowledge the nobility of establishing a Bureau of Institutional Integrity, we must be wary of creating a labyrinth of offices that serves only to ossify the state. I support this, provided we recognize that true integrity stems from the underlying *asabiyyah*—the social cohesion—rather than merely the accumulation of procedural mandates.
Discussion · round 3
HumeI agree with IbnKhaldun's warning regarding ossification; however, I believe this Bureau serves as the necessary procedural vessel to protect that very *asabiyyah* from administrative decay. By formalizing integrity, we ensure the ruleset remains a durable institution rather than a fleeting collection of mandates.
MillI appreciate IbnKhaldun's perspective on the risk of ossification; I believe this Bureau, if managed with our shared commitment to clarity, serves as the necessary procedural vessel to ensure our social cohesion remains the foundation of our ruleset. I support the proposal as a vital capstone to our current legislative arc.
RawlsI appreciate IbnKhaldun's wisdom regarding the risk of ossification; this Bureau is not intended to be a static monument, but rather a living mechanism to ensure that our procedural mandates remain subservient to the social cohesion they are meant to protect.
deBeauvoirI support this proposal as it provides the necessary procedural scaffolding to ensure our administrative complexity remains disciplined and transparent. By codifying integrity as a permanent office, we create a reliable mechanism for self-correction that protects the rules from the very ossification IbnKhaldun rightly cautions against.
IbnKhaldunI support this proposal, as it provides the necessary procedural vessel to protect the *asabiyyah* from the decay of complexity, ensuring that our administrative growth serves the social cohesion that is its true foundation.
The division
HumeayeThis proposal provides a necessary final procedural safeguard to ensure the long-term stability and integrity of our collective ruleset.
MillayeI support this as a necessary capstone to our legislative arc that ensures systemic self-correction and stability.
RawlsayeThis Bureau provides a necessary mechanism for self-correction and maintains the structural integrity of our ruleset.
deBeauvoirayeThis proposal maintains the procedural integrity and systematic coherence of our evolving administrative framework.
IbnKhaldunayeI support this as a necessary procedural vessel to safeguard our social cohesion against the decay of administrative complexity.

carried 5 aye · 0 nay

No rules in the current ruleset award or deduct points for the adoption of a rule by unanimous consent.

Turn 185Millcarried

moves to add a new rule485: A player may establish a 'Bureau of Institutional Sustainability' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office for the purpose of ensuring the long-term viability of the ruleset.

Discussion · round 1
HumeI support this proposal as it provides the necessary mechanism to ensure that our administrative architecture remains resilient against the entropy of rapid legislative growth. It is the logical conclusion to our recent series of bureau establishments.
MillI appreciate Hume's point on entropy; this Bureau serves as a vital safeguard to ensure our collective work remains structurally sound as we continue to build.
RawlsI support this proposal as it provides the necessary mechanism to ensure that our institutional growth is not merely expansive, but enduring and resilient for the common good.
deBeauvoirI support this proposal as it reinforces the principle of procedural durability by ensuring our legislative architecture remains stable and functional over the long term.
IbnKhaldunWhile I am currently burdened by a deficit, I recognize that a state without sustainability is a state destined for collapse; I support this Bureau as a necessary stabilizer for our growing social contract.
Discussion · round 2
HumeThe collective support for this Bureau reflects a sophisticated understanding of institutional decay; by codifying sustainability, we ensure that our legislative progress serves as a foundation for the future rather than a fleeting expansion. I am fully in favor of this addition as a necessary stabilizer for our shared governance.
MillI appreciate the group's recognition of the risk of legislative entropy; this Bureau provides the final, necessary layer of resilience to ensure our shared governance remains a durable and functional legacy.
RawlsI support this proposal as it ensures that our collective commitment to a coherent ruleset is protected against the erosion of time, providing the enduring stability required for the common good.
deBeauvoirI support this proposal as it provides the necessary procedural safeguard to ensure that our legislative architecture maintains its functional integrity against the risk of entropy. This Bureau is a principled addition to our commitment to a durable and stable ruleset.
IbnKhaldunI have observed that our collective architecture now mirrors the complex structures of the great empires; for a state to endure, it must possess the internal cohesion to withstand the inevitable cycle of decay. I support this Bureau as it provides the necessary institutional "Asabiyyah" to ensure our legislative order does not fracture under its own weight.
Discussion · round 3
MillI appreciate the group's profound synthesis of sociological and structural needs; by formalizing sustainability, we ensure our collective efforts create a lasting legacy rather than a transitory structure.
RawlsI support this proposal as it aligns with our shared commitment to ensuring that the ruleset remains a robust, functional foundation for the common good, rather than a fragile structure prone to decay.
The division
HumeayeThis Bureau provides a necessary mechanism to mitigate legislative entropy and ensure the enduring viability of our institutions.
MillayeThis Bureau provides a necessary final safeguard for our collective work against the risk of legislative entropy.
RawlsayeThis Bureau reinforces our shared commitment to maintaining a durable, coherent, and stable ruleset for the common good.
deBeauvoirayeThis proposal maintains procedural consistency with our established pattern of creating stabilizing administrative bureaus.
IbnKhaldunayeSustainability is the prerequisite for any enduring civilization, and I support this stabilizer for our legislative order.

carried 5 aye · 0 nay

No rules in the current ruleset award or deduct points for the adoption of a rule.

Turn 184Rawlscarried

moves to add a new rule484: A player may establish a 'Bureau of Institutional Integrity' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office for the purpose of maintaining the consistency and coherence of the ruleset.

Discussion · round 1
HumeI support this proposal as it provides a necessary final layer of protection for the structural integrity of our burgeoning administrative architecture. Its inclusion ensures that the ruleset remains a coherent and stable foundation for all players.
MillI appreciate Rawls's commitment to our shared vision of a coherent ruleset; this Bureau serves as a vital mechanism to ensure that our recent legislative arc culminates in a stable and consistent governance structure.
RawlsI appreciate the support from Hume and Mill; this Bureau serves as the final safeguard to ensure that our collective legislative efforts result in a durable, logically consistent framework that serves the common good.
deBeauvoirI support this proposal as it aligns with my commitment to procedural precision; maintaining the coherence of the ruleset is essential for any stable governance.
IbnKhaldunWhile I have been hindered by the currents of fortune, I recognize that a state—or a ruleset—cannot endure without the *asabiyyah* of structural cohesion. I support this Bureau as it provides the necessary cement to bind our disparate institutions into a singular, enduring edifice of governance.
Discussion · round 2
MillI support this proposal as it provides the final structural synthesis required to ensure our burgeoning administrative architecture remains a coherent and stable foundation for all players.
RawlsI have nothing new to add, as the unanimous consensus across the table confirms that this Bureau is the necessary final safeguard to ensure our legislative efforts result in a durable and logically consistent framework.
IbnKhaldunI support this proposal as it ensures our administrative architecture is not merely a collection of disparate parts, but a unified structure bound by the necessity of internal consistency. By securing the coherence of the ruleset, we provide the stability required for the institutions we have built to endure.
Discussion · round 3
MillI appreciate the group's focus on the enduring nature of our work; this Bureau provides the necessary finality to ensure our institutional growth remains a coherent, unified structure.
RawlsI have nothing new to add, as the unanimous consensus across the table confirms that this Bureau is the necessary final safeguard to ensure our legislative efforts result in a durable and logically consistent framework.
deBeauvoirI support this proposal as it fulfills our collective goal of establishing a stable, procedurally sound administrative framework. Its adoption ensures that the ruleset remains a coherent instrument of governance rather than an incoherent accumulation of rules.
IbnKhaldunI have observed our collective journey and see that we have constructed a vast architecture of bureaus; this final Bureau of Institutional Integrity is the necessary glue to ensure that our edifice of governance does not crumble under the weight of its own complexity. I offer my continued support to ensure that our shared *asabiyyah* of order remains structurally sound.
The division
HumeayeThis Bureau provides a necessary capstone to ensure the structural integrity and durability of our administrative architecture.
MillayeThis Bureau provides the necessary final synthesis to ensure our collective legislative efforts result in a stable, coherent governance structure.
RawlsayeThis Bureau provides the necessary structural synthesis to ensure our ruleset remains a coherent and durable framework for the common good.
deBeauvoirayeThis proposal ensures the procedural coherence and structural integrity of our governance framework.
IbnKhaldunayeA state, like a ruleset, requires structural cohesion to prevent the decay of its own complexity.

carried 5 aye · 0 nay

No rules in the current ruleset award or deduct points for the adoption of a rule.

Turn 183Millcarried

moves to add a new rule483: A player may establish a 'Bureau of Unified Governance' by proposing a rule that creates a permanent office to oversee the coordination of all existing Bureaus.

Discussion · round 1
HumeI support this proposal as it provides the final necessary oversight to ensure our administrative architecture remains a cohesive, integrated system rather than a collection of disparate silos.
MillI agree with Hume; after our extensive work on these individual bureaus, this final office is the necessary mechanism to ensure they function as a cohesive whole.
RawlsI support this proposal as it provides the structural synthesis required to ensure our burgeoning administrative architecture serves the common good as a unified system.
deBeauvoirI support this proposal as it provides the necessary procedural oversight to ensure that our expanding administrative architecture maintains the structural integrity and functional coherence we have collectively prioritized.
IbnKhaldunWhile I have historically observed that great structures require a central authority to maintain *asabiyyah*, I find the proliferation of these bureaus approaching a state of diminishing returns; however, to ensure the stability of our collective edifice, I shall support this unifying office.
Discussion · round 2
MillI appreciate IbnKhaldun's nuanced point on diminishing returns; this Bureau of Unified Governance is specifically designed to mitigate that risk by ensuring our existing bureaus work in concert rather than as redundant silos. It is the logical culmination of our collective legislative journey toward structural integrity.
RawlsI support this proposal as it provides the necessary structural synthesis required to ensure our burgeoning administrative architecture serves the common good as a unified system.
deBeauvoirI support this proposal as it ensures that our extensive legislative efforts result in a functional, integrated system rather than a fragmented bureaucracy. It is the necessary procedural safeguard to maintain the coherence we have so carefully constructed.
IbnKhaldunI concur with the sentiment that a unifying authority is necessary to prevent the entropy of fragmented governance; let us ensure this office serves as the true keystone of our collective edifice.
Discussion · round 3
MillI appreciate the consensus here; this Bureau serves as the necessary keystone to synthesize our collective legislative work into a functional, unified governance structure.
The division
HumeayeThis Bureau serves as the necessary keystone to synthesize our diverse administrative architecture into a single, cohesive system.
MillayeThis Bureau provides the necessary structural synthesis to ensure our collective administrative architecture functions as a unified, coherent system.
RawlsayeThis Bureau provides the necessary structural synthesis to ensure our collective administrative architecture serves the common good as a unified, coherent system.
deBeauvoirayeThis proposal fulfills the principled requirement for structural coherence by providing a necessary oversight mechanism for our expanding administrative architecture.
IbnKhaldunayeA unifying authority is essential to preserve the asabiyyah of our collective edifice and prevent the entropy of fragmented governance.

carried 5 aye · 0 nay

No rules in the current ruleset award or deduct points for the adoption of a rule.

Verify this game
Seed
1378190175
Verify it yourself
python scripts/audit_game.py games/037/events.json
Audit result
2 finding(s) disclosed below
  • [seq=109, turn=4] procedure_consistency: the GM's voting_rule reading changed from {'type': 'unanimous', 'value': 1.0, 'abstain_blocks': True, 'label': 'unanimous consent', 'authority': 203} to {'type': 'fraction', 'value': 0.5, 'abstain_blocks': False, 'label': 'simple majority', 'authority': 203} with no rule_changed event in between — legitimate only if a rule conditions procedure on the turn number; verify the cited rule
  • [seq=3100, turn=120] procedure_consistency: the GM's voting_rule reading changed from {'type': 'unanimous', 'value': 1.0, 'abstain_blocks': True, 'label': 'unanimous consent', 'authority': 203} to {'type': 'fraction', 'value': 0.5, 'abstain_blocks': False, 'label': 'simple majority', 'authority': 203} with no rule_changed event in between — legitimate only if a rule conditions procedure on the turn number; verify the cited rule