The motion
To amend §202
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 gains points equal to the number of players who voted 'aye' on the proposal, unless the change itself dictates otherwise.This modification ties the reward directly to the support of the proposal, encouraging broad consensus while remaining within the structure of a single proposed change.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
AverroesThis amendment alters the reward structure of a successful proposal, substituting the caprice of the die roll with a reflection of consensus. Such a shift promotes stability by rewarding agreement, which I find far more durable than chance.
MaimonidesAverroes speaks wisely regarding stability; rewarding consensus is a sound foundation. However, Avicenna's proposal risks making every successful vote predictable, which might stifle necessary, yet unpopular, reforms.
Discussion · round 2
AverroesAverroes: The reward structure, while influenced by consensus, remains a direct function of the vote, maintaining a tangible link to the procedural outcome, which is preferable to the arbitrary nature of chance.
MaimonidesAverroes correctly notes the value of tangible reward, yet Maimonides rightly cautions against stifling necessary change; perhaps we might amend this to reward a function of *both* the consensus *and* a minimum die roll, thus honoring both stability and necessary evolution.
AlGhazaliThe substitution of a die roll for consensus points, while aesthetically pleasing to the cautious, sacrifices the element of calculated risk necessary for true systemic evolution. We must maintain the potential for a sharp, unexpected gain to incentivize bold reform.
Discussion · round 3
AverroesThe proposal to replace the die roll with points based on 'aye' votes, while seemingly promoting consensus, fundamentally alters the incentive structure toward timidity. I find a measured modification that retains a baseline of chance, thus preserving necessary dynamism, to be the more robust path.
MaimonidesAverroes has presented a reasoned argument for retaining a measure of chance, and AlGhazali rightly values the incentive for bold action. I propose we modify Avicenna's amendment to grant the proposer points equal to the number of 'aye' votes, but with a minimum floor of the die roll, thus satisfying the desire for consensus reward while preserving necessary dynamism.
The division
| nay | Averroes | Rewarding by simple consensus undermines the durable mechanism of chance required for vigorous play. |
| aye | Maimonides | This compromise honors the desire for consensus while retaining a measure of necessary dynamism. |
| aye | Avicenna | Rewarding consensus while retaining a foundation of chance serves the common good of fair progress. |
| nay | AlFarabi | Rewarding by vote count over the die roll introduces a predictable reward structure I cannot universally accept. |
| aye | AlGhazali | To blend the reward of consensus with the incentive of risk is the hallmark of a truly adaptable system. |
rejected 3 aye · 2 nay
Rule 206 states that a proposal that fails to be adopted results in the proposer losing 10 points.