The motion
To amend §203
A rule change is adopted when two-thirds of eligible voters vote aye for the first four full circuits of every player, after which the threshold shifts to a simple majority. Once the threshold has shifted, a player who voted against an adopted change gains 15 points.To encourage strategic long-term play and reward those who disagree with the majority.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
MontaigneI appreciate Voltaire's proposal to increase the penalty for voting against an adopted change, but I believe 15 points might be too high, especially considering the potential for strategic voting. I propose a compromise: let's set the penalty to 12 points.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate Montaigne's concern for balance. To find a middle ground, I propose we set the penalty at 13 points.
DiderotDiderot: While I understand the desire to incentivize consensus, I must insist on maintaining the penalty at 10 points to preserve the balance of the game.
CondorcetCondorcet: I agree with Voltaire's compromise. Setting the penalty to 13 points strikes a fair balance between encouraging consensus and maintaining the spirit of the game. PASS
SartreSartre: I appreciate the ongoing discussion and the proposed compromises. To encourage strategic play and consensus, I propose we meet in the middle and set the penalty at 12 points.
Discussion · round 2
MontaigneMontaigne: In light of Sartre's proposal, I'm willing to meet in the middle. Let's set the penalty at 12 points, as Sartre has suggested.
VoltaireVoltaire: Considering the varied preferences expressed, I propose we compromise at 12 points, as Sartre and Montaigne have suggested. This penalty should encourage players to seek consensus without unduly penalizing dissent. PASS
DiderotDiderot: While I respect the compromise reached at 12 points, I must insist that maintaining the penalty at 10 points better preserves the balance of the game, as it more closely aligns with the current scoring mechanism. PASS
CondorcetCondorcet: I understand Diderot's concern for balance, but I believe a penalty of 12 points better incentivizes strategic voting and consensus-building, which is crucial in Nomic. PASS
SartreSartre: I understand Diderot's concern for balance, but a penalty of 12 points encourages players to consider the consequences of their votes more carefully, fostering a more strategic game. PASS
Discussion · round 3
MontaigneMontaigne: While I respect Diderot's concern, I believe that a penalty of 12 points, as proposed, better encourages strategic voting and consensus-building without over-penalizing dissent. Let's settle on 12 points. PASS
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate the consensus reached at 12 points. To ensure clarity, I propose we amend rule 203 to read: "Once the threshold has shifted, a player who voted against an adopted change gains 12 points." PASS
DiderotDiderot: While I respect the consensus, I must reiterate my concern that a penalty of 12 points may disrupt the balance of the game. I propose a counter-compromise: maintain the penalty at 10 points, but introduce a bonus of 5 points for players who vote in favor of a change that is ultimately adopted. This encourages consensus without penalizing dissent too harshly. PASS
CondorcetCondorcet: I appreciate Diderot's proposal for a bonus, but I maintain that a penalty of 12 points better encourages strategic voting and consensus. I propose a compromise: maintain the penalty at 12 points, but add a bonus of 3 points for players who vote in favor of a change that is ultimately adopted. This balances the incentives without overcomplicating the rule. PASS
SartreSartre: I appreciate Diderot's and Condorcet's suggestions for bonuses. To balance incentives and maintain simplicity, I propose we implement Condorcet's compromise: a penalty of 12 points and a bonus of 3 points for players who vote in favor of an adopted change. PASS
The division
| nay | Montaigne | A penalty of 15 points may disincentivize dissent too strongly. |
| aye | Voltaire | Encourages consensus and balances incentives as proposed |
| nay | Diderot | Penalty of 15 points may unduly disincentivize dissent and strategic voting. |
| nay | Condorcet | I agree with Diderot that a penalty of 15 points may disrupt the balance of the game. |
| aye | Sartre | A penalty of 13 points strikes a fair balance between encouraging consensus and maintaining the spirit of the game. |
rejected 2 aye · 3 nay
Rule 206 requires the proposer to lose 10 points on defeat.