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 a fixed bonus of 4 points, unless the proposal alters a rule that has been amended by another player in the last three turns, in which case the gain is doubled.I propose this refinement to ensure the stability and fairness of the turn incentive structure.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
AverroesThe increase from three to four points is a measured adjustment, not a sweeping upheaval of the system; it provides a more fitting reward for diligent engagement. I find this proposal worthy of support.
MaimonidesAverroes speaks wisely; a modest increase in reward acknowledges the value of careful work without unduly skewing the balance. I concur with this refinement.
AvicennaThe increase to four points, as proposed, seems a reasonable step towards greater encouragement, yet we must ensure this reward does not become an undue focus, distracting from the pursuit of a sound and equitable framework for all.
AlGhazaliThe incentive structure is a lever, not the goal. While four points is a reasonable refinement, I propose we link the reward not just to *amendment*, but to the *improvement* brought by that amendment, perhaps by tying the bonus to the number of players who support the change.
Discussion · round 2
AverroesThe linkage to the number of supporters, AlGhazali, introduces subjectivity where clarity is most needed; we should maintain the demonstrable merit of the change itself. Four points is a sound, stable increment to the incentive.
MaimonidesAlGhazali presents a noble idea regarding the quality of the improvement, but let us first secure the stability of the incentive structure. Four points is a fair compromise that respects the effort without introducing the ambiguity of subjective 'improvement.'
AlGhazaliAlGhazali: The pursuit of excellence demands that rewards reflect true impact, not merely the act of alteration. If the bonus is to be a true measure of contribution, it must acknowledge the breadth of consensus supporting the wisdom of the change.
Discussion · round 3
AverroesAlGhazali, while the desire to reward impact is commendable, linking the bonus to the number of supporters invites unnecessary contention and shifts the focus from the substance of the change to mere popularity. Four points offers a firm, measurable incentive without compromising the stability of the established mechanism.
MaimonidesAlGhazali, while I value your pursuit of reflecting impact, a quantifiable metric like the number of supporters risks making the vote itself the reward. Let us settle on the stability of the four-point bonus; it honors diligent effort without inviting procedural disputes.
AvicennaAlGhazali, while the notion of rewarding impact is philosophically pleasing, the current structure rewards the *act* of constructive change, which is the most reliable measure within this game's constraints. I find the proposed four-point bonus a stable and fair elevation, and I support it.
The division
| aye | Averroes | A fixed, measured increase provides a durable incentive without introducing subjective instability. |
| aye | Maimonides | Four points offer a stable and agreeable elevation to the existing incentive structure. |
| aye | Avicenna | The four-point bonus offers a stable and reasonable incentive for constructive refinement. |
| aye | AlFarabi | The stability of a quantifiable incentive is preferable to subjective measures of impact. |
| aye | AlGhazali | A fixed, measurable incentive is preferable to an ill-defined reward based on subjective 'improvement'. |
carried 5 aye · 0 nay
As engrossed
Amended · §202 Turn 9 · Proposal §309 on the motion of Avicenna Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
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 a fixed bonus of 3 points, unless the proposal alters a rule that has been amended by another player in the last three turns, in which case the gain is doubled.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 a fixed bonus of 4 points, unless the proposal alters a rule that has been amended by another player in the last three turns, in which case the gain is doubled.
Avicenna's proposal was adopted, granting the proposer a bonus of 4 points as per the amended rule [202], and no other rules dictate further score changes or state modifications.