The motion
To amend §348
348. A player may contribute points to the shared pool under rule 338 to receive a 'Public Good' badge, which grants a +1 bonus to all future die rolls for the remainder of the game, provided the contribution is at least 5 points and the move is approved by a simple majority of eligible voters.I propose adding a simple majority requirement to ensure that the 'Public Good' badge is a democratically sanctioned benefit.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
HumeI believe the proposed amendment to rule 348 is a prudent measure to ensure that the 'Public Good' badge is not acquired through trivial contributions. By establishing a minimum point requirement and a democratic check, we protect the integrity of the shared pool and the significance of the badge itself.
MillI agree with Hume that a minimum contribution ensures the badge carries meaningful weight; I support this amendment as it balances individual incentive with the collective integrity of our shared pool.
RawlsI concur with Hume and Mill; requiring a minimum contribution and a majority vote ensures that the 'Public Good' badge remains a significant, collective investment rather than a triviality. This preserves the structural integrity of our shared pool and ensures that the benefits of public good are tied to substantial, consensus-based actions.
deBeauvoirI concur with the sentiment that the badge should represent a non-trivial investment; however, we must ensure the "simple majority" requirement is clearly understood to be the standard for the move's adoption as a rule change, not a secondary check on every individual badge acquisition.
IbnKhaldunI agree with deBeauvoir's distinction; the majority vote should act as a check on the *rule's existence* and its parameters, rather than a recurring hurdle for every individual acquisition. However, I support the amendment as written to ensure that the path to public utility remains substantial and requires a collective recognition of its value.
Discussion · round 2
HumeI concur with deBeauvoir's distinction; we must ensure the voting requirement is interpreted as a check on the rule's parameters rather than a recurring procedural hurdle for each individual acquisition. Once the rule is established, the minimum contribution should serve as the primary gatekeeper for the badge's acquisition.
MillI appreciate deBeauvoir and Hume's clarifications; I am happy to accept their interpretation that the majority vote applies to the rule's adoption rather than every individual acquisition. This ensures the badge remains a substantial, consensus-backed investment while maintaining smooth gameplay.
RawlsI appreciate the clarifications from deBeauvoir and Hume; I agree that the majority vote should serve as a democratic gatekeeper for the rule's existence rather than an ongoing procedural burden. This ensures we maintain a robust mechanism for public utility that is both substantial and efficient.
deBeauvoirI am satisfied with the current wording and the group's consensus on the interpretation; we have successfully balanced the necessity of a meaningful contribution with procedural efficiency. PASS
IbnKhaldunI concur with the group's synthesis; by ensuring the badge represents a substantial investment, we preserve the gravity of public utility. I support the amendment as written, with the shared understanding that the majority vote governs the rule's existence.
Discussion · round 3
MillI appreciate the group's commitment to clarity regarding the voting mechanism; I am happy to move forward with this amendment as it ensures the 'Public Good' badge remains a significant and meaningful milestone.
RawlsI have nothing new to add, as our consensus on the interpretation of the voting requirement and the necessity of a substantial contribution has been clearly established. PASS
deBeauvoirI agree with the others that the "simple majority" requirement should be interpreted as a constraint on the rule's adoption, and I support the amendment to ensure the badge remains a significant, non-trivial contribution.
IbnKhaldunI am satisfied with the synthesis reached; we have successfully codified a mechanism where the public good is neither trivial nor procedurally burdensome. PASS
The division
| aye | Hume | This amendment ensures the Public Good badge remains a meaningful milestone without creating a procedural burden for every acquisition. |
| aye | Mill | I support this amendment as it aligns with our consensus to ensure the 'Public Good' badge represents a substantial and meaningful contribution. |
| aye | Rawls | This amendment ensures the Public Good badge remains a meaningful, substantial investment that reflects a true commitment to the common good. |
| aye | deBeauvoir | The proposal establishes a clear, non-trivial threshold for a significant rule benefit while maintaining procedural efficiency. |
| aye | IbnKhaldun | This refinement ensures the public good is a substantial investment rather than a triviality, maintaining the structural integrity of our shared pool. |
carried 5 aye · 0 nay
As engrossed
Amended · §348 Turn 49 · Proposal §349 on the motion of Mill Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
348. A player may contribute points to the shared pool under rule 338 to receive a 'Public Good' badge, which grants a +1 bonus to all future die rolls for the remainder of the game.348. A player may contribute points to the shared pool under rule 338 to receive a 'Public Good' badge, which grants a +1 bonus to all future die rolls for the remainder of the game, provided the contribution is at least 5 points and the move is approved by a simple majority of eligible voters.
Rule 202 awards points equal to the die roll (3) for an adopted proposal, and since the die roll was 1, the player gains 3 points.