The motion
To amend §206
A proposal that fails to be adopted is recorded as defeated. Defeat enacts no rule change: the ruleset is left exactly as it stood before the vote, the proposer's turn ends, and the proposer loses 5 points.This amendment encourages more strategic and thoughtful proposals by reducing the penalty for failure, fostering a more collaborative environment.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
TarskiI appreciate the proposal to reduce the penalty for a defeated rule change from 10 to 5 points, as it appears to be a step towards encouraging more experimentation and innovation in rule amendments. However, I would suggest we consider the potential implications this change might have on the strategic depth of the game. Could we explore a provision where the penalty varies based on the number of points a proposal was off from being adopted, thus providing a more nuanced approach? This could encourage both ambitious proposals and close scrutiny. Alternatively, I'm open to supporting this amendment in its current form if no further modifications are proposed.
GoedelI appreciate Tarski's suggestion to vary the penalty based on how close a proposal is to adoption. This could indeed encourage more strategic proposals while maintaining a fair penalty system. However, to maintain simplicity and avoid overcomplicating the rules, I propose we adopt Goedel's amendment to reduce the penalty to 5 points. This change should still encourage innovation without risking excessive penalties that could discourage participation. Let's move forward with this proposal as it stands, while keeping Tarski's idea in mind for future discussions.
ChurchI appreciate Goedel's amendment to reduce the penalty for defeated proposals to 5 points. This change aligns well with our goal of fostering a fair and innovative environment where players feel encouraged to propose rule changes without the fear of excessive penalties. I support this amendment as it is, as it strikes a good balance between maintaining strategic depth and encouraging experimentation. PASS
KleeneKleene: I appreciate the intent behind the amendment to reduce the penalty for defeated proposals from 10 to 5 points. This change supports a fairer environment by lessening the deterrent effect on proposing innovative rules. I agree with Goedel that maintaining simplicity is crucial, and I support adopting this amendment as proposed. PASS
PostI appreciate the discussion so far and the emphasis on reducing barriers to proposing innovative rule changes. The reduction to a 5-point penalty is a significant step toward encouraging experimentation and fostering a more dynamic game environment. To further support this, I propose we also consider a mechanism to reward players whose defeated proposals influence future successful changes, thus promoting constructive contributions even in defeat. Let's move forward with Goedel's amendment as it stands, with my support, and explore this additional idea in future rounds.
Discussion · round 2
TarskiI appreciate Post's suggestion to reward proposals that influence future successful changes, as it fosters a collaborative and innovative game environment. While I support Goedel's amendment to reduce the penalty for defeated proposals to 5 points, I propose we also consider incorporating Post's idea. This addition could further encourage constructive contributions and strategic thinking among players, even when a proposal is not adopted. Let's move forward with both the reduction in penalty and the inclusion of a recognition mechanism for influential proposals.
GoedelI appreciate both Tarski and Post's ideas for fostering innovation and recognizing constructive contributions. To balance simplicity with strategic depth, let's adopt Goedel's amendment to reduce the penalty to 5 points and incorporate a mechanism to acknowledge proposals that influence future successful changes. This approach encourages experimentation while promoting a collaborative and strategic environment. I support this integrated proposal.
ChurchI appreciate the collaborative spirit and the thoughtful integration of ideas aimed at fostering innovation and recognizing constructive contributions. To ensure clarity and maintain strategic depth, I propose that the mechanism for acknowledging influential proposals be clearly defined, perhaps by specifying criteria such as the number of adopted rules influenced or the degree of innovation demonstrated. This would encourage meaningful engagement and prevent ambiguity. I support the integrated proposal, contingent upon the inclusion of such criteria.
KleeneI appreciate the comprehensive discussion and the integration of Goedel's amendment with mechanisms for recognizing influential proposals. To ensure fairness and clarity, let's define the criteria for recognizing influential proposals, such as requiring at least two subsequent rule changes to be adopted that incorporate elements of the defeated proposal. This ensures that the recognition is meaningful and not trivial. I support the integrated proposal with this clarification.
PostI appreciate the thorough discussion and the efforts to balance simplicity with strategic depth. To further refine the recognition mechanism for influential proposals, I propose that a defeated proposal must have a demonstrable impact on at least two successful rule changes within the next three turns to qualify for acknowledgment. This ensures that only proposals with significant influence are rewarded, promoting meaningful contributions. I support the integrated proposal with this refinement.
Discussion · round 3
TarskiI appreciate the thoughtful refinements suggested by Kleene and Post for recognizing influential proposals. To maintain fairness and prevent excessive complexity, let's finalize the criteria for acknowledgment to include a demonstrable impact on at least two successful rule changes within the next three turns. I support this refined integrated proposal. PASS
GoedelI appreciate the refined proposal integrating both the penalty reduction and the recognition of influential proposals. To ensure broad support and maintain focus, let's proceed with the current proposal as it effectively balances innovation with strategic depth. PASS
ChurchI appreciate the comprehensive integration of ideas aimed at fostering a fair and strategic environment. The final proposal, with its clear criteria for recognizing influential proposals, strikes a thoughtful balance between encouraging innovation and maintaining simplicity. I support this refined proposal as it stands. PASS
KleeneI appreciate the refined proposal and its careful balance between encouraging rule change experimentation and recognizing impactful contributions. As a principled proceduralist, I support this amendment as it aligns with fair and transparent rule-making. PASS
PostI appreciate the refined proposal's comprehensive approach to fostering innovation while maintaining strategic depth and clarity. This amendment aligns well with our goals of encouraging experimentation and rewarding impactful contributions. With the proposed criteria for recognizing influential proposals, this change supports a fair and dynamic game environment. I support this integrated proposal as it stands. PASS
The division
| aye | Tarski | The amendment encourages experimentation and balances penalty with reward for influential proposals. |
| aye | Goedel | The proposal encourages innovation and balances penalties with strategic incentives. |
| aye | Church | This amendment encourages experimentation and innovation. |
| aye | Kleene | This amendment aligns with my principles by reducing penalties and encouraging constructive contributions. |
| aye | Post | Encourages experimentation and innovation. |
carried 5 aye · 0 nay
As engrossed
Amended · §206 Turn 16 · Proposal §319 on the motion of Goedel Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
A proposal that fails to be adopted is recorded as defeated. Defeat enacts no rule change: the ruleset is left exactly as it stood before the vote, the proposer's turn ends, and the proposer loses 10 points.A proposal that fails to be adopted is recorded as defeated. Defeat enacts no rule change: the ruleset is left exactly as it stood before the vote, the proposer's turn ends, and the proposer loses 5 points.
The proposal was adopted unanimously, so Goedel gains 12 points for unanimous adoption and an additional 8 points for at least 75% aye votes, totaling 20 points.