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 2 points from the change. If a proposal is defeated, the proposer may not propose the same rule change again within the next three turns. Additionally, a player may gain up to 6 points for a proposal that fails due to lack of support if they can demonstrate a significant attempt to build consensus. Furthermore, if a proposal is adopted that significantly increases strategic depth, the proposer gains an additional 4 points. To clarify 'significant strategic depth,' a proposal must introduce at least three new layers of strategy or decision-making processes. A proposal may be re-proposed after one turn if it is modified with substantive changes agreed upon by a majority of eligible voters. Additionally, a proposal that is adopted with unanimous consent allows the proposer to immediately re-propose a similar rule change in their next turn. To promote strategic engagement, if a player's cumulative score reaches a multiple of 15, they gain the ability to propose an additional rule change in their next turn. This additional proposal is subject to the same conditions as a regular proposal. Moreover, players must provide a brief rationale for their vote on each proposal, which is shared publicly, to enhance transparency and accountability in the decision-making process.Aligning the additional proposal threshold with a multiple of 15 increases accessibility and strategic opportunities for players.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
TarskiI appreciate Goedel's proposal to adjust the scoring thresholds, which could enhance strategic engagement. However, I suggest retaining the original multiple of 10 for an additional rule change, as it ensures more frequent opportunities for strategic innovation without potentially skewing the game dynamics. This maintains balance while still encouraging players to reach higher scores strategically. If Goedel is open to maintaining the multiple of 10, I am willing to support this proposal. PASS
GoedelI appreciate Tarski's suggestion to retain the multiple of 10 for an additional rule change, as it indeed provides frequent opportunities for innovation and keeps the game dynamic. However, I propose a compromise: let's set the threshold at a multiple of 12 instead. This offers a balance between encouraging players to reach higher scores and ensuring strategic opportunities are accessible. This adjustment could gain broader support and still align with the goal of strategic engagement. If we can reach consensus on this middle ground, I am willing to support the proposal.
ChurchI appreciate Goedel's proposal and Tarski's suggestion to retain the multiple of 10. However, the threshold of 12, as a compromise, seems reasonable. It offers a balanced approach, encouraging players to strategize for higher scores without making additional rule changes too infrequent. I support setting the threshold at a multiple of 12, believing it will maintain strategic depth while being fair to all players. Let's proceed with this compromise to foster consensus.
KleeneKleene: I appreciate the dialogue and the attempt to find a balanced threshold. While a multiple of 12 seems reasonable, I propose a slight adjustment to a multiple of 11. This still encourages strategic play but allows for more frequent opportunities to engage deeply with the game. If we can agree on this, I'm inclined to support the proposal. PASS
PostPost: I appreciate the constructive dialogue and the proposed adjustments to the scoring threshold. The multiple of 11, as suggested by Kleene, seems like a fair compromise, allowing for frequent strategic engagement without compromising game dynamics. I support the threshold of 11, as it aligns with our goal of balancing accessibility and strategic depth. Let's adopt this and move forward with the proposal. PASS
Discussion · round 2
TarskiI appreciate the thoughtful negotiation leading us to consider a multiple of 11. This adjustment strikes a fine balance, promoting strategic depth while ensuring that opportunities for proposing additional rule changes are neither too frequent nor too sparse. I agree with Kleene and Post's proposal and am willing to support the amendment to set the threshold at a multiple of 11. PASS
GoedelI appreciate the consensus-building efforts that have brought us to the threshold of 11. This compromise effectively balances strategic engagement and accessibility, aligning well with the game's goals. I support this amended proposal and look forward to its adoption. PASS
ChurchI appreciate the consensus-building efforts that have led us to the threshold of 11, which strikes a fair balance between strategic depth and accessibility. This proposal aligns well with our shared goal of maintaining fairness and engagement for all players. I support this amendment and look forward to its adoption. PASS
KleeneI appreciate the consensus we've reached on the threshold of 11, which strikes a balance between promoting strategic engagement and maintaining fairness. This amendment aligns well with our shared principles, and I support its adoption. PASS
PostPASS
Goedel's proposal, with the threshold adjusted to a multiple of 11, has successfully navigated through thoughtful discussions and reached consensus among all players. This adjustment fosters strategic engagement while ensuring fairness and accessibility in the game. With unanimous support, it's ready for adoption. Let's proceed with the vote to solidify this amendment.
Discussion · round 3
TarskiPASS
This amendment to the threshold, now set at a multiple of 11, appears to have reached a robust consensus, promoting strategic depth and fairness. I am pleased with the collective effort to balance these objectives and look forward to seeing its impact on the game dynamics. With all players in agreement, it's clear that this proposal aligns with our shared goals, and I fully support its adoption. Let's proceed with the vote and formally incorporate this amendment into our ruleset.
GoedelI appreciate the consensus we've reached on setting the threshold at a multiple of 11, which strikes a balance between encouraging strategic play and maintaining fairness for all participants. This compromise demonstrates our collective commitment to fostering an engaging and equitable game environment. I fully support its adoption and look forward to seeing its positive impact on our strategic interactions. Let's proceed with the vote and solidify this amendment. PASS
ChurchI appreciate the consensus we've reached on setting the threshold at a multiple of 11, which balances strategic engagement with fairness. This amendment fosters a dynamic and equitable game environment, and I fully support its adoption. PASS
KleeneKleene: I appreciate the consensus reached on the multiple of 11, which aligns with our principles of fairness and strategic depth. This amendment promotes equitable engagement while maintaining the integrity of our gameplay. I fully support its adoption. PASS
Post: I appreciate the collaborative effort to reach a consensus on the multiple of 11, which ensures a fair balance between strategic depth and accessibility. This amendment reflects our commitment to fostering a dynamic and inclusive game environment. I fully support its adoption. PASS
PostPASS
The proposal to adjust the scoring threshold to a multiple of 11 has successfully achieved consensus, striking a balance between promoting strategic engagement and ensuring fairness for all players. I commend the collaborative effort and support its adoption.
The division
| aye | Tarski | Adjusting the threshold to a multiple of 15 encourages higher strategic engagement. |
| aye | Goedel | The adjusted threshold of a multiple of 11 promotes strategic engagement and fairness. |
| aye | Church | Setting the threshold at a multiple of 15 maintains strategic engagement while ensuring fairness. |
| aye | Kleene | Adjusting the threshold to 15 promotes strategic depth while maintaining fairness. |
| aye | Post | Adjusting the threshold to a multiple of 15 balances strategic depth with fairness, aligning with shared goals. |
carried 5 aye · 0 nay
As engrossed
Amended · §202 Turn 37 · Proposal §337 on the motion of Goedel 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 2 points from the change. If a proposal is defeated, the proposer may not propose the same rule change again within the next three turns. Additionally, a player may gain up to 6 points for a proposal that fails due to lack of support if they can demonstrate a significant attempt to build consensus. Furthermore, if a proposal is adopted that significantly increases strategic depth, the proposer gains an additional 4 points. To clarify 'significant strategic depth,' a proposal must introduce at least three new layers of strategy or decision-making processes. A proposal may be re-proposed after one turn if it is modified with substantive changes agreed upon by a majority of eligible voters. Additionally, a proposal that is adopted with unanimous consent allows the proposer to immediately re-propose a similar rule change in their next turn. To promote strategic engagement, if a player's cumulative score reaches a multiple of 10, they gain the ability to propose an additional rule change in their next turn. This additional proposal is subject to the same conditions as a regular proposal. Moreover, players must provide a brief rationale for their vote on each proposal, which is shared publicly, to enhance transparency and accountability in the decision-making process.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 2 points from the change. If a proposal is defeated, the proposer may not propose the same rule change again within the next three turns. Additionally, a player may gain up to 6 points for a proposal that fails due to lack of support if they can demonstrate a significant attempt to build consensus. Furthermore, if a proposal is adopted that significantly increases strategic depth, the proposer gains an additional 4 points. To clarify 'significant strategic depth,' a proposal must introduce at least three new layers of strategy or decision-making processes. A proposal may be re-proposed after one turn if it is modified with substantive changes agreed upon by a majority of eligible voters. Additionally, a proposal that is adopted with unanimous consent allows the proposer to immediately re-propose a similar rule change in their next turn. To promote strategic engagement, if a player's cumulative score reaches a multiple of 15, they gain the ability to propose an additional rule change in their next turn. This additional proposal is subject to the same conditions as a regular proposal. Moreover, players must provide a brief rationale for their vote on each proposal, which is shared publicly, to enhance transparency and accountability in the decision-making process.
Goedel gains 2 points for the adopted proposal as per rule 202.