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 the current number of mutable rules multiplied by 3, rounded down, with a minimum of 3 and a maximum of 9.This amendment encourages more strategic rule changes by increasing potential bonus points.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
BooleI appreciate DeMorgan's proposal to increase the bonus points multiplier from 2 to 3. However, I would prefer a more measured approach to maintain stability. A proposal to adjust the multiplier to 2.5, rounded down, with a minimum of 3 and a maximum of 8, could strike a balance by providing incremental incentives while preserving strategic depth. This adjustment would encourage thoughtful proposals without risking the excessive rule proliferation that a larger increase might prompt.
By proposing a multiplier of 2.5, we ensure that the bonus remains substantial enough to incentivize strategic rule changes while avoiding potential pitfalls from rapid rule multiplication. This measured increase aligns with our goal of maintaining durable institutions in the game.
I look forward to discussing this further and reaching a consensus.
DeMorganVenn: I appreciate both Boole's and DeMorgan's proposals for adjusting the bonus multiplier. The suggestion to use a multiplier of 2.5 strikes a good balance between incentivizing rule changes and maintaining strategic integrity. I propose we consider adding a periodic review mechanism to assess the impact of this adjustment after a set number of turns. This could help ensure that the change remains beneficial and aligned with our collective goals. I'm open to further negotiations to refine this proposal for a well-rounded consensus.
Add your contribution: respond to others, press your case, or negotiate/trade support. One or two sentences, plain text. If you have nothing new to add, reply with exactly: PASS
VennI appreciate the thoughtful proposals from Boole and DeMorgan, as well as Venn's suggestion for a periodic review mechanism. This balanced approach aligns well with our goal of maintaining strategic integrity while fostering dynamic gameplay. I propose that we adopt the multiplier of 2.5, with a periodic review every ten turns to assess its impact. This will ensure that the rule change remains beneficial and adaptable to our evolving strategies. Let's work towards a consensus that supports both innovation and stability in our game.
JevonsI appreciate the thoughtful contributions from Boole, DeMorgan, and Venn. The proposal to adjust the bonus multiplier to 2.5, with a periodic review every ten turns, aligns well with maintaining strategic depth while encouraging rule innovation. This balanced approach ensures that rule changes remain beneficial and adaptable. I propose adopting this adjusted multiplier with the periodic review mechanism to foster both innovation and stability in our game. Let's move forward with this well-rounded consensus.
Add your contribution: respond to others, press your case, or negotiate/trade support. One or two sentences, plain text. If you have nothing new to add, reply with exactly: PASS
PeanoPeano: I appreciate the collaborative effort that has led to this well-rounded proposal. Adjusting the bonus multiplier to 2.5, with a periodic review every ten turns, strikes a balance between incentivizing strategic rule changes and maintaining game stability. This approach ensures that rule changes remain beneficial and adaptable to our evolving strategies. I fully support adopting this proposal, as it aligns with our shared goal of fostering innovation while preserving the integrity of the game's structure. Let's proceed with this thoughtful consensus.
Discussion · round 2
BooleI fully support the refined proposal to amend rule 202 by adjusting the bonus multiplier to 2.5, with a minimum of 3 and a maximum of 8, coupled with a periodic review every ten turns. This balanced approach fosters strategic depth while ensuring adaptability and sustainability within our game structure. I look forward to our collective endorsement of this thoughtful amendment.
DeMorganDeMorgan: I appreciate the thorough discussions and consensus-building efforts that have led to this refined proposal. Adjusting the bonus multiplier to 2.5, with a minimum of 3 and a maximum of 8, and incorporating a periodic review every ten turns, strikes an excellent balance between encouraging strategic rule changes and maintaining game stability. This approach ensures that rule changes remain beneficial and adaptable, fostering innovation while preserving the integrity of the game's structure. I fully endorse this proposal and look forward to its adoption by all players. Let's proceed with this well-rounded consensus.
VennVenn: I fully endorse the well-considered proposal to amend rule 202. Adjusting the bonus multiplier to 2.5, with a minimum of 3 and a maximum of 8, coupled with a periodic review every ten turns, strikes a balance between incentivizing strategic rule changes and maintaining the integrity of our game. This approach ensures that rule changes remain beneficial and adaptable, fostering a dynamic yet stable environment. I look forward to our collective endorsement of this thoughtful amendment, as it aligns with our shared goal of promoting innovation while preserving the game's structure. Let's proceed with this well-rounded consensus.
JevonsPass.
As a principled proceduralist, I support changes that I could reasonably accept if invoked against me. The proposed amendment to rule 202, adjusting the bonus multiplier to 2.5 with a periodic review every ten turns, strikes a balanced approach that incentivizes strategic rule changes while maintaining stability. This proposal aligns with the goal of fostering innovation without compromising the game's integrity. It also introduces a mechanism for periodic review, ensuring adaptability and sustainability. Therefore, I am in favor of adopting this well-considered proposal.
PeanoPeano: I appreciate the comprehensive discussions and the collaborative effort that has led to this refined proposal. Adjusting the bonus multiplier to 2.5, with a minimum of 3 and a maximum of 8, coupled with a periodic review every ten turns, strikes a balance between incentivizing strategic rule changes and maintaining the stability of our game. This approach ensures that rule changes remain beneficial and adaptable, fostering a dynamic yet sustainable environment. I fully support adopting this proposal, as it aligns with our shared goal of promoting innovation while preserving the game's structure. Let's proceed with this thoughtful consensus.
Discussion · round 3
BooleI fully endorse the refined proposal to amend rule 202. By adjusting the bonus multiplier to 2.5, with a minimum of 3 and a maximum of 8, and implementing a periodic review every ten turns, we ensure a balanced approach that incentivizes strategic rule changes while maintaining stability and adaptability within the game. This proposal not only fosters innovation but also preserves the integrity and sustainability of our game's structure. I am confident that this well-considered amendment aligns with our collective goals and look forward to our joint endorsement and its adoption by all players. Let's proceed with this well-rounded consensus.
DeMorganPeano: I fully support the proposal to amend rule 202 by adjusting the bonus multiplier to 2.5, with a minimum of 3 and a maximum of 8, and incorporating a periodic review every ten turns. This balanced approach encourages thoughtful rule changes while ensuring stability and adaptability. I look forward to our collective endorsement of this well-rounded amendment.
VennI fully support the proposal to amend rule 202 by adjusting the bonus multiplier to 2.5, with a minimum of 3 and a maximum of 8, and incorporating a periodic review every ten turns. This approach strikes a balance between incentivizing strategic rule changes and maintaining the stability and adaptability of our game. It aligns with our collective goal of promoting innovation while ensuring the game's structure remains fair and sustainable. Let's proceed with this well-rounded consensus.
JevonsPass.
As a principled proceduralist, I support changes that I could reasonably accept if invoked against me. The proposed amendment to rule 202, adjusting the bonus multiplier to 2.5 with a periodic review every ten turns, strikes a balanced approach. It incentivizes strategic rule changes while maintaining stability and adaptability within the game. This proposal aligns with the goal of fostering innovation without compromising the game's integrity. I am in favor of adopting this well-considered proposal.
PeanoPeano: I appreciate the thoughtful and collaborative effort that has led to this refined proposal. Adjusting the bonus multiplier to 2.5, with a minimum of 3 and a maximum of 8, and incorporating a periodic review every ten turns, strikes a balanced approach. This ensures that rule changes remain beneficial and adaptable, fostering a dynamic yet stable environment. I fully support adopting this proposal, as it aligns with our shared goal of promoting innovation while preserving the integrity of the game's structure. Let's proceed with this well-rounded consensus.
The division
| aye | Boole | This proposal aligns with our goal of incentivizing strategic rule changes while maintaining stability, with a well-considered periodic review mechanism. |
| aye | DeMorgan | This proposal strikes a balance between incentivizing strategic rule changes and maintaining game stability. |
| aye | Venn | The proposal balances incentivizing rule changes with maintaining game stability through the periodic review mechanism. |
| aye | Jevons | The proposal provides a balanced approach with periodic review, aligning with my proceduralist principles. |
| aye | Peano | The proposal effectively balances strategic rule changes with game stability, aligning with my reformist goals. |
carried 5 aye · 0 nay
As engrossed
Amended · §202 Turn 36 · Proposal §336 on the motion of DeMorgan 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 bonus points equal to the current number of mutable rules multiplied by 2, rounded down, with a minimum of 3 and a maximum of 8.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 current number of mutable rules multiplied by 3, rounded down, with a minimum of 3 and a maximum of 9.
DeMorgan's proposal was adopted, awarding them points based on the new rule text.