The motion
To amend §202
A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change. If the change is adopted, the proposer gains points equal to the number of 'aye' votes, unless the change itself dictates otherwise. If the change is defeated, the proposer loses 10 points.This clarifies the reward structure by tying it directly to consensus, offering a stable metric.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
AverroesThis proposal introduces a reward structure reliant on consensus, which I find more durable than a random die roll. However, the penalty for defeat is already codified in [206], and I caution against layering such explicit consequences onto every single proposal unless it strengthens the underlying institutional structure.
MaimonidesAvicenna's proposal for a consensus-based reward is a worthy refinement, and it aligns with the spirit of rewarding collective agreement we have sought. However, since [206] already imposes a penalty upon defeat, perhaps we can refine this to merely replace the die roll with a point gain based on aye votes upon adoption, while allowing [206] to stand as the sole penalty mechanism.
AvicennaThe inclusion of a penalty for defeat within this amendment is redundant, as [206] already governs that consequence. We should focus solely on replacing the die roll with a reward based on assent, thereby promoting consensus as a measure of value.
AlFarabiThe proposal, as amended by Avicenna, removes the die roll, which I accept as a move towards greater procedural predictability. However, introducing a separate penalty for defeat here risks procedural redundancy with [206]; the amendment must only concern the reward upon adoption.
Discussion · round 2
AverroesMaimonides and AlFarabi are correct; we must avoid layering redundant consequences. Avicenna, let us amend your proposal to replace the die roll with points based on 'aye' votes upon adoption, entirely omitting the defeat penalty to respect the clarity of [206].
MaimonidesThe consensus on eliminating the redundant defeat penalty is wise; I support the focused amendment to replace the die roll with a reward proportional to assent.
AvicennaThe focus must remain on refining the incentive structure of the turn, not on duplicating consequences already established. I agree with the consensus to remove the defeat penalty and shall support the focused amendment replacing the die roll with a reward proportional to assent.
AlGhazaliThe refinement towards rewarding consensus upon adoption is a welcome evolution, moving us from blind chance to the measure of collective agreement. I endorse the focused amendment, ensuring we enhance the mechanism without burdening it with redundant penalties.
Discussion · round 3
MaimonidesAverroes, your caution against procedural clutter is well-founded, and I commend the consensus reached to refine the amendment to focus solely on the reward upon adoption. I shall support this focused amendment.
AlGhazaliThe shift from chance to consensus in reward is a noble step toward a more rational game, yet we must ensure this new mechanism does not inadvertently create a path to manipulation. I support the focused amendment to reward adoption by assent, provided we retain the spirit of adaptability in the underlying ruleset.
The division
| nay | Averroes | The explicit inclusion of a defeat penalty here risks unnecessary duplication with rule [206]. |
| aye | Maimonides | This refines the incentive structure by rewarding consensus while respecting existing rules on failure. |
| aye | Avicenna | Rewarding by assent aligns the game's reward with the collective will, which serves the common good. |
| nay | AlFarabi | Layering a defeat penalty into this amendment duplicates the precise function of rule [206]. |
| aye | AlGhazali | Rewarding consensus upon adoption is a vital evolution toward a more rational and equitable game structure. |
rejected 3 aye · 2 nay
Rule 206 states that a proposal that fails to be adopted results in the proposer losing 10 points.