The motion
To amend §204
[204] (mutable) A rule change may be adopted without every voter's assent once the threshold has shifted to a simple majority (rule 203); a player who voted against an adopted change gains 2 points and remains bound by the change exactly as if they had voted for it.I propose a slight amendment to rule 204 to increase the reward for dissent to 2 points, aligning it with the consensus we reached in turn 4.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
HumeI support this amendment; it aligns with our previous consensus to reduce the rewards for dissent, thereby fostering a more cooperative and less polarized environment.
MillI agree with Hume; lowering the dissent reward to 2 points maintains the integrity of the majority rule while removing the incentive to obstruct progress. This aligns perfectly with our recent shift toward a more cooperative atmosphere.
RawlsI believe this amendment is a necessary step toward our shared goal of a cooperative table; reducing the dissent reward to 2 points minimizes the incentive for obstruction while still acknowledging the principle of minority opposition.
deBeauvoirI support this amendment, as it reinforces the principle of procedural cooperation without granting the "veto" of the minority an outsized advantage. By aligning the dissent reward with our established preference for smaller point increments, we ensure that the move toward a simple majority remains a mechanism for progress rather than a tool for opportunistic point-farming.
IbnKhaldunI support this amendment; by aligning the dissent reward with our established preference for smaller increments, we ensure that the mechanism of majority rule serves the evolution of the ruleset rather than providing a windfall for obstruction.
Discussion · round 2
MillI appreciate the unified support from everyone; this amendment successfully harmonizes the dissent reward with our previous consensus on smaller point increments. By ensuring the reward is meaningful but not disruptive, we solidify a cooperative environment where progress is the priority.
RawlsI fully concur with the consensus; by harmonizing the dissent reward with our established preference for smaller increments, we ensure that the transition to a simple majority serves the common good of the game's evolution rather than incentivizing obstruction.
Discussion · round 3
MillI am heartened by the unanimous consensus; this change effectively balances our need for decisive progress with our commitment to a cooperative game environment. Since everyone is in agreement, I believe we have reached the most stable and fair configuration for the dissent reward.
RawlsI concur with the group's assessment; this amendment ensures that the transition to a simple majority serves the common good by preventing the dissent reward from becoming a primary strategy for point accumulation. I support this change as a vital step in maintaining a fair and cooperative game environment.
deBeauvoirI have nothing new to add.
IbnKhaldunThe consensus is intellectually sound; by reducing the dissent reward to 2 points, we ensure that the "asabiyyah" of the majority remains the primary driver of progress, preventing the fragmentation of our collective goals through trivial point-seeking. I offer my full support to ensure the ruleset evolves toward a stable and harmonious equilibrium.
The division
| aye | Hume | This amendment aligns with our collective interest in fostering a cooperative environment by reducing the incentives for obstruction. |
| aye | Mill | This change perfectly aligns with our collective goal of reducing obstruction while maintaining the integrity of the majority rule. |
| aye | Rawls | This amendment aligns with our collective goal of fostering cooperation by preventing the dissent reward from becoming an incentive for obstruction. |
| aye | deBeauvoir | This amendment aligns with the established principle of procedural cooperation by preventing opportunistic point-farming while maintaining the integrity of the majority rule. |
| aye | IbnKhaldun | Reducing the dissent reward to 2 points harmonizes the ruleset and prevents the fragmentation of our collective progress through trivial point-seeking. |
carried 5 aye · 0 nay
As engrossed
Amended · §204 Turn 12 · Proposal §312 on the motion of Mill Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
A rule change may be adopted without every voter's assent once the threshold has shifted to a simple majority (rule 203); a player who voted against an adopted change gains 10 points and remains bound by the change exactly as if they had voted for it.[204] (mutable) A rule change may be adopted without every voter's assent once the threshold has shifted to a simple majority (rule 203); a player who voted against an adopted change gains 2 points and remains bound by the change exactly as if they had voted for it.
Rule 311 awards points equal to the die roll (3) for an adopted rule change, as rule 306 is not present.