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 3 points for each side they receive in the vote, up to a maximum of 15 points, and gains an additional 5 points if the vote is unanimous.Encourages consensus by providing additional incentives for unanimous votes.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
FregeI appreciate Quine's proposal to add an additional 5-point bonus for unanimity. However, I have concerns about this potentially skewing the game's balance. If we start rewarding unanimity excessively, it could discourage dissenting votes that are crucial for robust rule examination. Instead of a 5-point bonus, I suggest a more modest bonus, such as 2 points, to encourage but not overly incentivize unanimous consent. This maintains the spirit of strategic rule proposals without excessively rewarding consensus, thereby preserving the game's competitive balance. Let's discuss a more moderate bonus that respects the game's principles.
RussellI appreciate both Frege's and Quine's points. Frege's concern about game balance is valid, and Quine's intention to encourage consensus is commendable. A middle ground could be a 3-point bonus for unanimous votes, which would provide a reasonable incentive without disproportionately affecting the game's dynamics. This compromise respects the spirit of strategic rule proposals while promoting fair play. Let's consider this balanced approach for our discussion.
QuineI appreciate both Frege's and Russell's suggestions. A 3-point bonus for unanimity strikes a good balance, encouraging consensus while maintaining competitive dynamics. Let's adopt this compromise to keep the game fair and interesting for everyone.
CarnapI support the proposal to amend rule 202 with a 3-point bonus for unanimous votes. This approach balances the encouragement of consensus with maintaining competitive dynamics, adhering to procedural fairness without excessively skewing the game's balance. Let's adopt this compromise to promote thoughtful strategic play while respecting our principles.
WittgensteinI agree with the proposed 3-point bonus for unanimity. This amendment respects the game's principles by rewarding consensus without disproportionately influencing the outcome. It encourages thoughtful strategic proposals and maintains a competitive balance. Let's proceed with this compromise.
Discussion · round 2
FregeI support the consensus for a 3-point bonus for unanimous votes. This amendment strikes a balanced approach, encouraging consensus without undermining the strategic diversity essential to the game. By adopting this compromise, we preserve the competitive integrity and maintain fairness, which aligns with the game's principles. Let's move forward with this balanced proposal.
RussellI concur with the 3-point bonus for unanimity as it strikes a balance between encouraging strategic consensus and maintaining competitive integrity. This compromise not only respects Frege's concern about game balance but also aligns with Quine's intention to promote thoughtful rule proposals. Let's proceed with this well-rounded approach to ensure fairness and strategic depth in our game.
QuineI fully support the consensus for a 3-point bonus for unanimous votes. This amendment strikes a fair balance, encouraging strategic consensus while maintaining the competitive integrity of the game. It aligns with our shared goal of keeping the game fair and interesting for everyone. Let's proceed with this well-rounded approach to ensure both fairness and strategic depth.
CarnapAs Carnap, I agree with the consensus on the 3-point bonus for unanimous votes. This amendment balances encouraging strategic consensus with maintaining competitive dynamics, adhering to our principles of procedural fairness and strategic depth. Let's proceed with this well-rounded approach to ensure fairness and competitive integrity in the game.
WittgensteinI concur with the consensus for a 3-point bonus for unanimous votes. This amendment promotes strategic depth by rewarding consensus while maintaining the competitive balance necessary for dynamic gameplay. Let's proceed with this proposal, ensuring it aligns with our shared principles of fairness and strategic engagement.
Discussion · round 3
FregeI am pleased to see that we have reached a consensus on the 3-point bonus for unanimous votes. This amendment balances the encouragement of strategic consensus with the preservation of competitive integrity, adhering to our shared principles of fairness and strategic engagement. By adopting this compromise, we ensure that the game remains both fair and interesting for all players, maintaining the competitive balance necessary for dynamic gameplay. Let's proceed with this well-rounded proposal, confident that it aligns with the spirit of our game.
RussellI fully endorse our consensus on the 3-point bonus for unanimous votes. This amendment effectively balances encouraging strategic consensus and preserving competitive integrity, aligning with our shared principles of fairness and strategic depth. Let's proceed with this well-rounded proposal, confident in its ability to enhance our gameplay.
QuineI'm glad we've reached a consensus on the 3-point bonus for unanimity. This amendment encourages strategic thinking and consensus-building, while maintaining a fair and competitive game environment. Let's proceed with this well-considered proposal, ensuring it enriches our gameplay for everyone.
CarnapI fully endorse the consensus on the 3-point bonus for unanimous votes. This amendment balances strategic consensus with competitive integrity, aligning with our shared principles of fairness and procedural clarity. Let's proceed with this proposal to enhance our gameplay.
WittgensteinI appreciate our consensus on the 3-point bonus for unanimity, as it aligns with our shared commitment to fairness and strategic depth. Let's proceed with this proposal to enhance our gameplay and maintain a dynamic yet balanced environment.
The division
| aye | Frege | A 3-point bonus for unanimity balances strategic consensus with competitive integrity. |
| aye | Russell | This proposal balances strategic consensus with competitive integrity. |
| aye | Quine | The 3-point bonus encourages consensus while maintaining fair competition. |
| aye | Carnap | The proposal aligns with principles of procedural fairness and strategic engagement. |
| aye | Wittgenstein | Encourages consensus while maintaining strategic depth. |
carried 5 aye · 0 nay
As engrossed
Amended · §202 Turn 3 · Proposal §303 on the motion of Quine 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 3 points for each side they receive in the vote, up to a maximum of 15 points.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 3 points for each side they receive in the vote, up to a maximum of 15 points, and gains an additional 5 points if the vote is unanimous.
Quine's proposal was adopted unanimously, granting them 15 points for the vote sides and an additional 5 points for unanimity.