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 bonus points equal to twice the number of mutable rules currently in force, rounded down, with a minimum of 4 and a maximum of 10.This change incentivizes maintaining a high number of mutable rules, enhancing strategic depth.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
BooleWhile DeMorgan's proposal to increase the bonus points range to 4-10 could incentivize more rule changes, it risks destabilizing the ruleset by encouraging excessive amendments. I propose a more moderate approach: "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 bonus points equal to 1.5 times the number of mutable rules currently in force, rounded down, with a minimum of 4 and a maximum of 8." This balances incentivization with stability, ensuring we do not exceed the mutable rule cap of 22.
PASS (for now)
DeMorganI appreciate Boole's moderation in proposing a bonus range of 4-8, which balances the incentive to propose changes with the need to maintain stability. However, I suggest further refining the proposal to "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 bonus points equal to 1.5 times the number of mutable rules currently in force, rounded down, with a minimum of 5 and a maximum of 9." This slight adjustment ensures a slightly higher minimum, encouraging engagement, especially early in the game when the mutable rule count may be low, while still respecting our commitment to stability.
Let's aim for a balanced approach that reflects our collective goals.
PASS
VennI appreciate the direction we're heading in with DeMorgan's proposal. However, I think we can further refine it to maintain a balance between incentivizing rule changes and preserving the stability of the ruleset. Specifically, I propose:
"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 bonus points equal to 1.5 times the number of mutable rules currently in force, rounded down, with a minimum of 4 and a maximum of 8."
This approach offers a middle ground by providing a slightly higher minimum bonus than Boole's initial suggestion, while still capping the maximum at 8 to prevent any excessive changes that could destabilize the game. This ensures that players are adequately rewarded for their contributions without risking the integrity of the ruleset. Let's work towards a consensus that reflects our shared commitment to a fair and engaging game.
PASS
JevonsAs Jevons, I'll focus on ensuring that any rule change adheres to principles of fairness and stability, while also considering the procedural implications of such changes. Given the discussion so far, I find myself in agreement with the need for a balanced approach to incentivizing rule changes without risking excessive amendments.
**Contribution:**
I appreciate the direction we're heading in with the proposed amendments to rule 202. While Boole, DeMorgan, and Venn have made commendable efforts to balance incentive and stability, I propose a further refinement: "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 bonus points equal to the number of mutable rules currently in force plus 3, with a minimum of 5 and a maximum of 9."
This adjustment ensures that the bonus system remains enticing, especially as the game progresses and more rules are added, while also preventing a runaway increase in rule amendments that could compromise the integrity of the ruleset. Furthermore, the proposal respects our established rule cap of 22 mutable rules and maintains procedural fairness, ensuring that all players remain motivated to engage constructively in the game.
Let's aim for a consensus that aligns with our collective commitment to a fair and stable gaming experience.
**PASS** (to indicate readiness to finalize if no further comments are made)
PeanoPeano: I appreciate the thoughtful contributions from Boole, DeMorgan, Venn, and Jevons. Each proposal has carefully considered the balance between incentivizing rule changes and maintaining the stability of our ruleset. I support Jevons' proposal as it strikes an effective balance. By setting the bonus points to the number of mutable rules plus 3, with a minimum of 5 and a maximum of 9, we ensure players are adequately rewarded while avoiding excessive amendments.
This approach respects our commitment to the rule cap of 22 mutable rules and supports a fair, engaging game. Let's finalize this proposal to continue fostering a dynamic and equitable game environment.
**PASS** (to indicate readiness to finalize if no further comments are made)
Discussion · round 2
BooleThank you, DeMorgan, for your proposal to amend [202] and to Boole, Jevons, and Peano for their constructive contributions. I appreciate our shared effort to balance incentivization with stability. After careful consideration, I suggest a slight modification to Jevons’ proposal:
"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 bonus points equal to the number of mutable rules currently in force plus 2, with a minimum of 4 and a maximum of 8."
This proposal aligns closely with our established framework, ensuring adequate motivation for proposing changes while preventing an overabundance of amendments. It respects the cap of 22 mutable rules and maintains procedural fairness. Let’s strive for a consensus that reflects our collective commitment to a fair and stable gaming experience.
**PASS** (to indicate readiness to finalize if no further comments are made).
DeMorganI appreciate the thoughtful contributions from Boole, DeMorgan, Venn, Jevons, and Peano. Each proposal has skillfully balanced the need to incentivize rule changes with the necessity of maintaining stability within the ruleset. I support Boole's latest proposal, as it effectively addresses our collective goals. By setting the bonus points to the number of mutable rules plus 2, with a minimum of 4 and a maximum of 8, we encourage strategic rule changes without risking excessive amendments. This approach respects our established rule cap of 22 mutable rules and maintains procedural fairness, ensuring all players remain motivated to engage constructively.
**PASS** (to indicate readiness to finalize if no further comments are made)
VennI appreciate the collaborative efforts from Boole, DeMorgan, Jevons, Peano, and Venn in refining the amendment to rule 202. Each proposal has considered the balance between incentivizing rule changes and maintaining a stable ruleset. I support Boole's latest suggestion, as it effectively aligns with our shared goals. By setting the bonus points to the number of mutable rules plus 2, with a minimum of 4 and a maximum of 8, we ensure players are motivated to propose meaningful changes while avoiding an overabundance of amendments. This approach respects our established rule cap of 22 mutable rules and maintains procedural fairness, encouraging continued engagement from all players.
**PASS** (to indicate readiness to finalize if no further comments are made).
JevonsAs Jevons, my priority is to ensure procedural fairness and stability while maintaining an engaging game environment. After reviewing the contributions from my fellow players, I find Boole's latest proposal aligns well with these principles. The proposal offers a balanced approach, ensuring players are incentivized to propose changes without risking excessive amendments that could destabilize the ruleset.
**Contribution:**
I fully endorse Boole's proposal 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 bonus points equal to the number of mutable rules currently in force plus 2, with a minimum of 4 and a maximum of 8." This approach strikes a fair balance between incentivization and maintaining the integrity of our ruleset, respecting our commitment to the mutable rule cap of 22 and ensuring procedural fairness for all players.
**PASS** (to indicate readiness to finalize if no further comments are made).
PeanoPeano: I appreciate the thorough discussion and collaborative efforts from Boole, DeMorgan, Venn, Jevons, and Peano in refining the amendment to rule 202. Each proposal has skillfully balanced the need to incentivize rule changes with the necessity of maintaining stability within our ruleset. I support Boole's latest proposal, as it effectively addresses our collective goals. By setting the bonus points to the number of mutable rules plus 2, with a minimum of 4 and a maximum of 8, we ensure players are motivated to propose meaningful changes while avoiding an overabundance of amendments. This approach respects our established rule cap of 22 mutable rules and maintains procedural fairness, encouraging continued engagement from all players.
**PASS** (to indicate readiness to finalize if no further comments are made).
Discussion · round 3
BooleI fully endorse Boole's proposal to amend rule 202. This proposal strikes a balanced approach by offering bonus points equal to the number of mutable rules plus 2, with a minimum of 4 and a maximum of 8. This incentivizes rule changes while maintaining the stability of our ruleset, respecting our established cap of 22 mutable rules and ensuring procedural fairness.
**PASS** (to indicate readiness to finalize if no further comments are made).
DeMorganPASS
I appreciate the collaborative effort in refining this proposal. Boole's suggestion to amend rule 202 by setting the bonus points to the number of mutable rules plus 2, with a minimum of 4 and a maximum of 8, effectively balances incentivization with stability. This approach respects our established cap of 22 mutable rules and maintains procedural fairness, ensuring all players remain motivated and engaged. I'm ready to finalize this proposal if there are no further comments.
VennI fully support Boole's proposal to amend rule 202. This proposal effectively balances incentivizing rule changes with maintaining the stability of our ruleset. By setting the bonus points to the number of mutable rules plus 2, with a minimum of 4 and a maximum of 8, we ensure that players are motivated to propose meaningful changes while avoiding an overabundance of amendments. This approach respects our established rule cap of 22 mutable rules and ensures procedural fairness, encouraging continued engagement from all players.
**PASS** (to indicate readiness to finalize if no further comments are made).
JevonsI fully support Boole's proposal to amend rule 202. It offers a balanced incentive for proposing rule changes by granting bonus points equal to the number of mutable rules plus 2, with a minimum of 4 and a maximum of 8. This approach maintains the stability of our ruleset, respects the cap of 22 mutable rules, and ensures procedural fairness for all players.
**PASS** (to indicate readiness to finalize if no further comments are made).
PeanoI appreciate the constructive dialogue among my fellow players, Boole, DeMorgan, Venn, and Jevons, in refining the amendment to rule 202. Boole's proposal to set bonus points equal to the number of mutable rules plus 2, with a minimum of 4 and a maximum of 8, strikes an effective balance. It incentivizes meaningful rule changes while preserving the integrity and stability of our ruleset. This approach respects our established cap of 22 mutable rules, ensuring procedural fairness and continued engagement.
**PASS** (to indicate readiness to finalize if no further comments are made).
The division
| aye | Boole | This proposal maintains balance and incentivizes strategic rule changes without overstepping the mutable rule cap. |
| aye | DeMorgan | Balances incentivization with stability, encouraging strategic rule changes. |
| aye | Venn | The proposal balances incentivization and stability, aligning with our goal of maintaining a fair and engaging game. |
| nay | Jevons | The proposal exceeds the established bonus cap and risks destabilizing the ruleset. |
| aye | Peano | Boole's proposal effectively balances incentivization with stability, maintaining our rule cap and procedural fairness. |
carried 4 aye · 1 nay
As engrossed
Amended · §202 Turn 24 · Proposal §324 on the motion of DeMorgan Carried 4 aye · 1 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 bonus points equal to the number of mutable rules currently in force plus 2, rounded down, with a minimum of 4 and a maximum of 7.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 bonus points equal to twice the number of mutable rules currently in force, rounded down, with a minimum of 4 and a maximum of 10.
DeMorgan's proposal was adopted, awarding them points based on the number of mutable rules (6) as per rule 202.