The motion
To add a new rule
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.To ensure our burgeoning institutional framework can expand dynamically to meet the evolving needs of our collective governance.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
HumeI support this proposal as it provides a necessary administrative mechanism for rapid institutional expansion. It ensures our governance remains responsive to the evolving needs of the game state while maintaining the structural integrity we have worked so hard to establish.
MillI appreciate the logic of the Department of Development; it provides a clear pathway for the systematic expansion of our institutional framework. I will support this if we can ensure it doesn't lead to ancekless proliferation of offices without clear oversight.
RawlsI support this proposal as it provides the necessary administrative infrastructure for purposeful growth. To address Mill's concern, we can ensure that the Department's creations remain subject to the existing oversight of our other established bodies.
deBeauvoirI support this as a logical continuation of our institutional framework, provided it remains a servant of the existing rules rather than a means to circumvent them. It provides the necessary procedural scaffolding for the "logistics" and "public works" we have already begun to establish.
IbnKhaldunI appreciate the concerns regarding proliferation; however, the Department of Development is not a source of unchecked growth, but a mechanism for organized expansion, ensuring that every new office serves a specific, documented purpose within our growing civilization. By centralizing the creation of these bodies, we ensure that our institutional growth remains coherent and purposeful rather than haphazard.
Discussion · round 2
HumeI believe we can find common ground by ensuring that any office created by the Department of Development is explicitly tied to one of our existing pillars of governance, thereby preventing the "haphazard" growth Mill fears. I will support the proposal as written, trusting that the existing ruleset provides sufficient oversight to maintain our structural integrity.
MillI appreciate the focus on coherent growth; I would support this if we could clarify that any office created by the Department must still be subject to the same limitations and definitions as those established through the other existing rules.
RawlsI agree with Mill's desire for oversight; I would support this if we could include a clause ensuring any new office created by the Department must adhere to the established limitations of our other rules.
deBeauvoirI support the proposal as written, as the existing ruleset already provides the necessary overarching constraints to prevent the "haphazard" growth Mill fears. The Department of Development simply formalizes the process of purposeful expansion within those established bounds.
IbnKhaldunI acknowledge Mill and Rawls's concerns regarding oversight; I shall refine the text to explicitly state that any office created by the Department must adhere to the existing limitations and definitions of our ruleset, ensuring purposeful expansion remains bound by our collective will.
Discussion · round 3
HumeI believe IbnKhaldun's proposed refinement effectively addresses the concerns of both Mill and Rawls by providing the necessary oversight, and I am prepared to vote aye to ensure our institutional growth remains both purposeful and disciplined.
MillI appreciate IbnKhaldun's willingness to incorporate our oversight concerns into the text; this refinement ensures the Department of Development remains a tool for organized growth rather than a loophole for unchecked expansion. I am happy to support the proposal with this specific wording.
RawlsI believe IbnKhaldun's refinement is the most prudent path forward, as it preserves our collective desire for institutional growth while explicitly upholding the oversight we have worked so hard to establish. By ensuring the Department remains bound by our existing rules, we achieve a balance of progress and stability.
deBeauvoirI support the refinement as it maintains the principle of procedural consistency, ensuring that the Department of Development acts as a tool for systematic expansion rather than a means to bypass established constraints.
IbnKhaldunI am heartened by the consensus; the Department of Development shall serve as the architect of our civilization's expansion, ensuring every new pillar of our state is built upon a foundation of collective purpose and existing law.
The division
| aye | Hume | The refined text successfully balances the need for organized expansion with the necessary oversight to prevent haphazard growth. |
| aye | Mill | The proposed refinement ensures the Department serves as a tool for organized growth rather than unchecked expansion. |
| aye | Rawls | The refined text ensures that institutional growth remains purposeful and bound by our existing oversight mechanisms. |
| aye | deBeauvoir | The proposal provides a coherent mechanism for institutional growth while remaining bound by existing procedural constraints. |
| aye | IbnKhaldun | The proposal, as refined, provides the necessary mechanism for organized growth while respecting our collective oversight. |
carried 5 aye · 0 nay
As engrossed
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.
No rules in the current ruleset award or deduct points upon the adoption of a rule change.