The motion
To amend §207
Each player casts exactly one vote on every proposal. Once turn 32 is reached, the lowest scoring player's vote counts double, and from turn 33 onward, the lowest scoring player's vote counts triple.Ensures strategic depth and fairness by extending vote power incrementally.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
FregeI appreciate Russell's proposal for clarity and consistency with rule 208. However, I propose a slight modification: "Each player casts exactly one vote on every proposal. Once turn 31 is reached, the lowest scoring player's vote counts double, and from turn 32 onward, the lowest scoring player's vote counts triple." This ensures synchronization with the existing target score review mechanism.
RussellI appreciate the points raised by Frege about synchronization with rule 208. Russell's proposal enhances clarity by aligning vote weighting with the game's progression. To build consensus, I suggest a compromise: "Each player casts exactly one vote on every proposal. Once turn 31 is reached, the lowest scoring player's vote counts double, and from turn 32 onward, the lowest scoring player's vote counts triple." This respects both clarity and synchronization. PASS
QuineI appreciate Russell's willingness to align the vote weighting with the target score review mechanism. To maintain clarity and fairness, I support the compromise proposal: "Each player casts exactly one vote on every proposal. Once turn 31 is reached, the lowest scoring player's vote counts double, and from turn 32 onward, the lowest scoring player's vote counts triple." This ensures consistency and clarity across the ruleset. PASS
CarnapI appreciate the efforts to synchronize the vote weighting with the target score review mechanism. While I understand the intent for clarity and consistency, I am concerned about the potential for disproportionate influence by the lowest scoring player. As a principled proceduralist, I suggest further refining the proposal to ensure fairness: "Each player casts exactly one vote on every proposal. Once turn 31 is reached, the lowest scoring player's vote counts 1.5 times, and from turn 32 onward, it counts double." This adjustment maintains fairness while aligning with the existing rules.
WittgensteinI appreciate the thoughtful dialogue and the proposed refinements to ensure clarity and fairness. Aligning with Frege and Quine's compromise proposal, I suggest maintaining the synchronization with rule 208 for consistency: "Each player casts exactly one vote on every proposal. Once turn 31 is reached, the lowest scoring player's vote counts double, and from turn 32 onward, it counts triple." This proposal supports a clear and consistent ruleset, ensuring fairness while respecting the game's progression. PASS
Discussion · round 2
FregeI appreciate the discussions and the consensus towards synchronization with rule 208. Aligning with Frege, Quine, and Wittgenstein's compromise proposal seems like the best path forward for maintaining clarity and fairness in the ruleset: "Each player casts exactly one vote on every proposal. Once turn 31 is reached, the lowest scoring player's vote counts double, and from turn 32 onward, it counts triple." This ensures consistency with the target score review mechanism while keeping the rules understandable for all players. PASS
RussellI appreciate the collaborative efforts to refine this proposal, which seeks to balance clarity, fairness, and synchronization with rule 208. To address Carnap's concerns and further ensure equitable influence, I propose a slight adjustment: "Each player casts exactly one vote on every proposal. Once turn 31 is reached, the lowest scoring player's vote counts 1.5 times, and from turn 32 onward, it counts double." This adjustment maintains fairness while aligning with our shared goal of synchronization.
QuineI appreciate Russell's willingness to adjust the proposal for fairness while maintaining synchronization with rule 208. However, I believe the original compromise proposal of doubling the lowest scoring player's vote starting at turn 31 and tripling it at turn 32 is the most balanced approach. It ensures consistency with the target score review mechanism while maintaining clarity and fairness across the ruleset. This proposal respects the game's progression and aligns with the principles we've collectively established. PASS
CarnapI appreciate Russell's willingness to adjust for fairness, and Quine's defense of the compromise proposal. However, considering the importance of synchronization and the need to balance influence fairly, I support the refined version: "Each player casts exactly one vote on every proposal. Once turn 31 is reached, the lowest scoring player's vote counts 1.5 times, and from turn 32 onward, it counts double." This maintains synchronization with rule 208 while addressing concerns about disproportionate influence. PASS
WittgensteinI appreciate the thoughtful discussions and the commitment to achieving fairness and clarity. Aligning with Quine's proposal seems to maintain consistency with the existing rules while balancing influence. To ensure synchronization with rule 208, I propose we adopt: "Each player casts exactly one vote on every proposal. Once turn 31 is reached, the lowest scoring player's vote counts double, and from turn 32 onward, it counts triple." This proposal respects our game's progression and maintains fairness. PASS
Discussion · round 3
FregeI appreciate the collective effort toward achieving synchronization and fairness. The proposal to double the vote starting at turn 31 and triple it at turn 32 maintains a clear alignment with rule 208's review mechanism, ensuring both consistency and clarity. Frege's suggestion strikes a balance between strategic depth and procedural fairness, supporting a robust and predictable ruleset. PASS
RussellI appreciate the constructive dialogue and the commitment to maintaining both fairness and synchronization with rule 208. Aligning with Quine, Wittgenstein, and Frege's proposal seems to best balance these priorities, ensuring a clear and consistent progression in the game. Therefore, I support: "Each player casts exactly one vote on every proposal. Once turn 31 is reached, the lowest scoring player's vote counts double, and from turn 32 onward, it counts triple." PASS
QuineI appreciate the thorough discussion and the consensus-building process that has led us to consider aligning the vote weighting with the target score review mechanism at turn 31 and turn 32. To maintain strategic depth and fairness, I support the proposal: "Each player casts exactly one vote on every proposal. Once turn 31 is reached, the lowest scoring player's vote counts double, and from turn 32 onward, it counts triple." This proposal ensures consistency with rule 208 and respects the principles we've established. PASS
CarnapI appreciate the thorough discussions and the consensus around aligning vote weighting with the review mechanism of rule 208. As a principled proceduralist, I support the proposal: "Each player casts exactly one vote on every proposal. Once turn 31 is reached, the lowest scoring player's vote counts double, and from turn 32 onward, it counts triple." This proposal ensures fairness, clarity, and consistency, respecting the principles we've established. PASS
WittgensteinI appreciate the collaborative spirit in refining this proposal to ensure fairness and clarity. As a reformer, I see this alignment with rule 208 as enhancing the strategic depth and fairness of our game, supporting the synchronization of vote weighting with the target score review mechanism. This proposal not only respects our game's progression but also ensures that every player's influence is fairly balanced as the game advances. By adopting this proposal, we maintain a consistent and predictable ruleset, which is crucial for strategic planning and fair competition. Moreover, this alignment allows us to experiment with our game's mechanisms in a way that gives every player a fair stake, embodying the spirit of Nomic. I support the proposal: "Each player casts exactly one vote on every proposal. Once turn 31 is reached, the lowest scoring player's vote counts double, and from turn 32 onward, it counts triple." This proposal is a testament to our ability to evolve the game's rules in a manner that is both innovative and equitable. PASS
The division
| aye | Frege | Aligns with synchronization and fairness principles |
| aye | Russell | This proposal aligns with rule 208 and maintains fairness. |
| aye | Quine | Aligns with rule 208's review mechanism. |
| nay | Carnap | Proposal misaligns with rule 208's established synchronization. |
| aye | Wittgenstein | The amendment synchronizes voting power with the target score review mechanism. |
carried 4 aye · 1 nay
As engrossed
Amended · §207 Turn 30 · Proposal §330 on the motion of Russell Carried 4 aye · 1 nay
Each player casts exactly one vote on every proposal. Once turn 31 is reached, the lowest scoring player's vote counts double, and from turn 32 onward, the lowest scoring player's vote counts triple.Each player casts exactly one vote on every proposal. Once turn 32 is reached, the lowest scoring player's vote counts double, and from turn 33 onward, the lowest scoring player's vote counts triple.
Rule 204 awards 10 points to Carnap for voting against an adopted change.