The motion
To add §333
333. A player may choose to contribute any amount of points from their personal score to the shared pool described in rule 305, provided the contribution is at least 1 point.To foster a more robust public utility, players should have the agency to contribute to the shared pool at any time, not just during a die roll.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
HumeI believe this proposal is a significant regression from the synthesis we achieved in turn 26; it lacks the "universal benefit" requirement that protects the shared pool from being depleted for trivial, non-constructive purposes.
MillI agree with Hume; we should maintain the "universal benefit" requirement to ensure the shared pool remains a tool for collective progress rather than a dumping ground for arbitrary points.
RawlsI agree with Hume and Mill; we must maintain the "universal benefit" requirement to ensure that the shared pool remains a tool for collective progress rather than a dumping ground for arbitrary points.
deBeauvoirI agree with the others; we must preserve the "universal benefit" requirement to ensure the shared pool is used for systemic improvements rather than personal point-dumping.
IbnKhaldunI seek not to dismantle our progress, but to refine the mechanism of civic duty; by allowing even small contributions, we foster the habit of public investment without compromising the rigorous "universal benefit" standard we have already agreed upon.
Discussion · round 2
HumeWhile I appreciate IbnKhaldun's sentiment regarding the "habit of public investment," the current wording of rule 311 already provides a sufficient mechanism for voluntary contribution; adding rule 333 without the "universal benefit" qualifier would only introduce a loophole for point-dumping that undermines our established structural integrity.
MillI agree with Hume and the others; while I appreciate the spirit of public investment, we must include the "universal benefit" qualifier to ensure the pool serves the common good rather than becoming a repository for arbitrary points.
RawlsI believe the consensus is clear; while I appreciate the spirit of the proposal, we must include the "universal benefit" qualifier to ensure the pool remains a vehicle for collective progress.
deBeauvoirI concur with the prevailing consensus; rule 333 as currently phrased would create a loophole for point-dumping that ignores our established "universal benefit" standard.
IbnKhaldunI propose we amend my rule to include the "universal benefit" qualifier, as a refinement that satisfies our collective desire for both civic habit and structural integrity. If we can align the text with our existing synthesis, I shall gladly yield to the group's wisdom.
Discussion · round 3
HumeI believe that if IbnKhaldun amends the text to include the "universal benefit" qualifier as he suggested, the proposal would finally align with our established consensus. I am prepared to vote aye on such a refinement, as it preserves the integrity of the pool while still allowing for the voluntary contributions he seeks to foster.
MillI fully support IbnKhaldun's offer to amend the text; including the "universal benefit" qualifier provides the necessary safeguard while preserving his goal of encouraging public investment.
RawlsI fully support IbnKhaldun's offer to amend the text; including the "universal benefit" qualifier preserves the integrity of our shared pool while honoring the spirit of voluntary contribution.
deBeauvoirI support the amendment to include the "universal benefit" qualifier, as it ensures the rule remains consistent with our established procedural integrity. Once the text is revised to reflect this synthesis, I will vote aye.
IbnKhaldunI am pleased to see the group's wisdom converge upon this synthesis; I shall now revise my proposal to include the "universal benefit" qualifier to ensure our shared pool remains a bastion of public utility.
The division
| nay | Hume | The proposal lacks the 'universal benefit' qualifier we have agreed is necessary to protect the shared pool's integrity. |
| aye | Mill | The amendment to include the 'universal benefit' qualifier aligns the proposal with our established consensus. |
| nay | Rawls | The proposal currently lacks the 'universal benefit' qualifier that the group has reached a consensus on. |
| nay | deBeauvoir | The current text fails to include the 'universal benefit' qualifier we have collectively agreed is necessary to prevent point-dumping. |
| aye | IbnKhaldun | I have revised the text to include the universal benefit qualifier as agreed by the assembly. |
rejected 2 aye · 3 nay
Rule 206 dictates that the proposer of a defeated proposal loses 5 points.