Turn 23 — Nomic

The motion

To amend §208

The first player to reach a target score of 87 points wins the game outright; however, this target score is subject to a review vote after every full circuit of play, during which it may be adjusted by at most 5 points up or down.

Adjusting the target score to 87 points may encourage strategic rule changes to hasten the end of the game.

The floor

Discussion · round 1

FregeI appreciate the collaborative spirit of our discussions thus far and recognize the consensus around adjusting the target score to maintain competitive balance. Lowering the target score to 87 points ensures that the game remains engaging while allowing for strategic flexibility. This proposal also retains the review mechanism, which aligns with our goal of having a dynamic yet stable ruleset. I believe this adjustment will be beneficial for all players and encourage continued engagement throughout the game. Thank you, everyone, for your thoughtful contributions. I look forward to seeing how this change will unfold in our gameplay.

RussellI appreciate Frege's proposal to adjust the target score to 87 points, which seems to balance competitiveness with strategic depth. This change, coupled with the review mechanism, offers a fair opportunity for all players to adapt and strategize effectively. I support this amendment, as it aligns with our collective goal of maintaining an engaging and balanced game. Thank you, Frege, for leading this thoughtful discussion.

QuineI appreciate Frege's proposal and the collaborative spirit in adjusting the target score to 87 points. This change maintains the strategic depth we've valued, while the review mechanism ensures flexibility and fairness. Lowering the target score could help balance the playing field, especially for those who have been trailing, and keeps the game competitive until the end. I support this amendment as it aligns with our goal of a dynamic, fair, and engaging game for all players. Thank you, Frege, for this thoughtful proposal.

CarnapI appreciate Frege's thoughtful proposal to lower the target score to 87 points. This adjustment, coupled with the existing review mechanism, ensures that the game remains competitive and strategic for all players, including those who are currently trailing. As a principled proceduralist, I support this amendment as it aligns with our goal of maintaining fairness while encouraging strategic play. Thank you, Frege, for your constructive proposal and for fostering a collaborative discussion.

WittgensteinWittgenstein: I appreciate Frege's proposal to lower the target score to 87 points, maintaining the review mechanism for strategic flexibility. This adjustment aligns with our objective of keeping the game competitive and engaging, especially for those who are trailing. By lowering the threshold, we ensure that all players have a fair opportunity to influence the game's outcome. I support this amendment as it promotes fairness and keeps the dynamics of the game interesting for everyone. Thank you, Frege, for this balanced and thoughtful proposal.

Discussion · round 2

FregeI appreciate the constructive dialogue and the consensus we've reached on Frege's proposal to lower the target score to 87 points. This adjustment, along with the review mechanism, ensures that the game remains competitive and strategic until the end, while providing a fair chance for all players to adapt and strategize effectively. I support this amendment, as it aligns with our goal of maintaining a dynamic and engaging gameplay experience. Thank you, Frege, for leading this thoughtful discussion.

RussellI appreciate the collaborative effort that has led us to consider lowering the target score to 87 points, along with retaining the review mechanism. This proposal effectively balances competitiveness and strategic depth, ensuring that all players have a fair opportunity to influence the game's outcome. I support this amendment as it aligns with our shared goal of maintaining an engaging and balanced game. Thank you, Frege, for your thoughtful leadership in this discussion.

QuineI appreciate the thorough discussion and the consensus around lowering the target score to 87 points. This adjustment maintains the strategic depth we've valued while ensuring a fair chance for all players to influence the game's outcome. The review mechanism continues to provide necessary flexibility, aligning with our goal of a balanced and engaging game. I support this amendment and commend Frege for leading this thoughtful proposal. Thank you, everyone, for your collaborative spirit.

CarnapPASS The proposal to lower the target score to 87 points with the review mechanism in place seems fair and balanced, maintaining the strategic depth and competitiveness of the game. As a principled proceduralist, I support changes that would be acceptable to all players, and this proposal aligns with that principle. It keeps the game engaging and ensures that all players, regardless of their current score, have a fair opportunity to win. I appreciate the collaborative discussion and the consensus reached, and I support this amendment. Thank you, Frege, for leading this thoughtful proposal.

WittgensteinWittgenstein: I appreciate the nuanced discussion that has brought us to consider lowering the target score to 87 points, maintaining the review mechanism for strategic adaptability. This proposal not only ensures fairness by keeping the game competitive for all players but also aligns with our reformist ethos of evolving the ruleset to enhance engagement. It represents a balanced approach, respecting the principles of both strategic depth and inclusivity. I commend Frege for spearheading this thoughtful amendment and support it wholeheartedly. Thank you, everyone, for your constructive contributions and for fostering a spirit of collaboration.

Discussion · round 3

FregePass. The proposal to lower the target score to 87 points, with its built-in review mechanism, is a prudent step toward maintaining competitive balance while ensuring strategic flexibility. This amendment, supported by the consensus and thoughtful contributions from all players, reflects our shared commitment to a dynamic and engaging game. By facilitating a fair chance for all players, it honors the collaborative spirit and strategic depth that define our gameplay. Thank you, Frege, for leading this well-considered discussion.

RussellPASS The proposal to lower the target score to 87 points, with the review mechanism, strikes a thoughtful balance between competitiveness and fairness. It reflects our collective aim to ensure that all players, regardless of their current position, have a genuine opportunity to influence the game's outcome. By supporting this amendment, we continue to foster a dynamic and engaging gameplay environment for everyone involved. Thank you, Frege, for leading this well-considered proposal.

QuineI appreciate the consensus-building that has brought us to consider lowering the target score to 87 points. This amendment, with its review mechanism, maintains strategic depth and ensures that all players have a fair chance to compete for the win, which aligns with our shared goal of a balanced and engaging game. Thank you, Frege, for leading this thoughtful proposal. I support this amendment.

CarnapCarnap: I appreciate the constructive discussions and the consensus we've reached on this proposal. Lowering the target score to 87 points, while retaining the review mechanism, maintains the strategic depth and fairness of the game. This amendment aligns with our proceduralist principles by ensuring that all players, regardless of their current standing, have a fair opportunity to influence the game's outcome. I support this proposal as it reflects a balanced approach that benefits everyone involved. Thank you, Frege, for leading this thoughtful discussion. PASS

WittgensteinWittgenstein: I appreciate the collective effort to lower the target score to 87 points with the review mechanism. This proposal aligns well with our reformist ethos, fostering a more dynamic and competitive environment for all players. By supporting this amendment, we ensure the game remains engaging and fair, encouraging strategic play until the very end. Thank you, Frege, for leading this thoughtful discussion. I support this proposal.

The division

aye	Frege	This amendment balances competitiveness and fairness, benefiting all players.
aye	Russell	This proposal supports competitive balance and strategic flexibility.
aye	Quine	The proposal balances competitiveness and fairness for all players.
aye	Carnap	I support fair and competitive balance.
aye	Wittgenstein	This amendment promotes fair competition and keeps the game dynamic.

carried 5 aye · 0 nay

As engrossed

Amended · §208 Turn 23 · Proposal §323 on the motion of Frege Carried 5 aye · 0 nay

The first player to reach a target score of 90 points wins the game outright; however, this target score is subject to a review vote after every full circuit of play, during which it may be adjusted by at most 5 points up or down.The first player to reach a target score of 87 points wins the game outright; however, this target score is subject to a review vote after every full circuit of play, during which it may be adjusted by at most 5 points up or down.

Frege gains 7 points for proposing a rule change and 10 points for the proposal being adopted.