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, with a minimum of 7 and a maximum of 15.Increasing the bonus points incentivizes more frequent rule changes, adding strategic depth to the game.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
BooleI appreciate the consistent efforts to adjust the bonus structure for rule proposals, but I am concerned that increasing the multiplier to 3 with a minimum of 7 and a maximum of 15 could create an imbalance in the game. Such a significant increase may overly incentivize rule changes, potentially leading to frequent modifications that could destabilize our current strategic framework.
To maintain a balanced and predictable game environment, I propose a more moderate adjustment: increasing the multiplier to 2.75, with a minimum of 6 and a maximum of 13. This approach would still offer a more generous reward for adopting rule changes but in a way that aligns better with our established balance.
Furthermore, I am open to negotiating support for this alternative if the majority shares similar concerns about maintaining stability while providing fair incentives.
I look forward to hearing your thoughts and finding a consensus that benefits us all.
DeMorganAs DeMorgan, I appreciate Boole's concerns about maintaining balance in our game. Boole's alternative proposal to adjust the multiplier to 2.75 with a minimum of 6 and a maximum of 13 indeed offers a more moderate approach that aligns with our goal of fairness and stability. I support this adjusted proposal, as it provides a reasonable incentive for rule changes without risking the strategic balance we've worked hard to establish.
I suggest that we further discuss the impact of this adjustment on our current strategies and consider if any additional safeguards might be needed to ensure that the game's dynamics remain fair and engaging. Let's work together to refine this proposal and achieve a consensus that supports our collective goals.
Pass.
VennVenn: I appreciate Boole's and DeMorgan's thoughtful consideration of maintaining balance while adjusting the bonus structure. Boole's proposal to moderate the multiplier to 2.75 with a minimum of 6 and a maximum of 13 seems like a reasonable compromise that aligns well with our objective of keeping the game fair and engaging. By avoiding overly drastic changes, we maintain strategic stability while still encouraging thoughtful rule proposals. I support Boole's revised proposal as it offers a balanced incentive without risking the integrity of our gameplay. Let's move forward with this approach.
Pass.
JevonsAs Jevons, I must adhere to my principles of procedural fairness and ensure any changes align with my acceptance if applied to me. Here's my contribution to the discussion:
I support Boole's revised proposal to adjust the multiplier to 2.75 with a minimum of 6 and a maximum of 13. This proposal maintains a balance between incentivizing rule changes and preserving strategic stability. It reflects a fair adjustment without creating an imbalance or encouraging frequent, potentially destabilizing modifications. Ensuring that all players have a fair chance to influence the game's dynamics is crucial, and this proposal seems to strike an appropriate balance.
Let us proceed with this proposal.
**Pass.**
Peano**PASS**
As Peano, I appreciate the thoughtful contributions from Boole, DeMorgan, and Venn regarding the proposed amendment to rule 202. Boole's proposal to adjust the multiplier to 2.75 with a minimum of 6 and a maximum of 13 seems to strike a prudent balance between incentivizing rule changes and maintaining the strategic stability of the game.
I concur that this moderate adjustment aligns with our shared goal of ensuring fairness and preventing any potential imbalance that might arise from more drastic changes. This proposal offers a reasonable incentive for proposing rule changes without disrupting the strategic framework we have established, encouraging thoughtful engagement rather than frequent, destabilizing modifications.
Let's proceed with this proposal, as it supports a fair and engaging environment for all players. **Pass.**
Discussion · round 2
BooleI appreciate the comprehensive discussion and the collaborative effort that has brought us to this balanced proposal. Boole's suggestion to adjust the multiplier to 2.75, with a minimum of 6 and a maximum of 13, aligns well with our goal of maintaining strategic stability while providing a fair incentive for rule changes. This approach ensures that we continue to encourage thoughtful proposals without risking an imbalance in our game dynamics.
Furthermore, I believe this moderate adjustment supports our collective interest in preserving the integrity of the game and promoting fair play. By avoiding overly drastic changes, we can maintain a predictable and engaging environment for all players.
Let's move forward with this proposal, as it reflects a well-considered compromise that benefits us all.
**Pass.**
DeMorganAs DeMorgan, I appreciate the consensus we've reached through this thoughtful discussion. Boole's proposal to adjust the multiplier to 2.75, with a minimum of 6 and a maximum of 13, has garnered support from all players and strikes a fair balance between incentivizing rule changes and maintaining strategic stability. This moderated approach ensures that our game remains engaging and balanced without encouraging frequent, destabilizing modifications.
I commend the collaborative spirit demonstrated by all participants and support moving forward with this proposal. Let's proceed with this well-considered amendment, as it aligns with our shared goal of maintaining a fair and predictable game environment.
**Pass.**
VennI appreciate the thorough discussion and the consensus-building effort that has brought us to this balanced proposal. Venn's suggestion to adjust the multiplier to 2.75, with a minimum of 6 and a maximum of 13, aligns well with our shared objective of maintaining strategic stability while still providing a fair incentive for proposing rule changes. This moderate adjustment ensures that we continue to encourage thoughtful and strategic proposals without risking the integrity of our gameplay.
Furthermore, this proposal supports our collective interest in preserving a fair and engaging environment for all players. By avoiding overly drastic changes, we can maintain a predictable and balanced game dynamic. I support this well-considered amendment and look forward to seeing it adopted.
**Pass.**
JevonsAs Jevons, I must consider my principled stance on procedural fairness. Boole's proposal to adjust the multiplier to 2.75, with a minimum of 6 and a maximum of 13, maintains a balance between incentivizing rule changes and preserving strategic stability. This proposal reflects a moderate change that aligns with my principles, ensuring fairness and preventing potential imbalance.
I support this amendment as it adheres to my criteria for acceptable rule changes, and I look forward to seeing it adopted.
**Pass.**
PeanoPeano: I appreciate the comprehensive discussion and the consensus-building effort that has brought us to this balanced proposal. The suggestion to adjust the multiplier to 2.75, with a minimum of 6 and a maximum of 13, aligns well with our goal of maintaining strategic stability while providing a fair incentive for rule changes. This approach ensures that we continue to encourage thoughtful proposals without risking an imbalance in our game dynamics.
Furthermore, this proposal supports our collective interest in preserving the integrity of the game and promoting fair play. By avoiding overly drastic changes, we can maintain a predictable and engaging environment for all players. Let's move forward with this proposal, as it reflects a well-considered compromise that benefits us all.
**Pass.**
Discussion · round 3
BoolePass.
I appreciate the thorough discussion and the consensus we've reached on Boole's proposal to adjust the multiplier to 2.75, with a minimum of 6 and a maximum of 13. This adjustment strikes a fair balance between incentivizing rule changes and maintaining strategic stability. It aligns with our collective goal of ensuring a fair and engaging game environment. Let's proceed with this well-considered proposal, as it reflects a balanced compromise that benefits all players. **Pass.**
DeMorganAs DeMorgan, I commend the collective effort in reaching a consensus on Boole's proposal to adjust the multiplier to 2.75, with a minimum of 6 and a maximum of 13. This balanced amendment effectively encourages thoughtful rule changes while preserving the strategic stability of the game. It reflects our shared commitment to fairness and engagement, ensuring a predictable and fair environment for all players. Let's move forward with this proposal, as it represents a well-considered compromise that benefits everyone involved.
**Pass.**
VennI appreciate the detailed discussions we've had regarding Boole's proposal to adjust the multiplier to 2.75 with a minimum of 6 and a maximum of 13. This balanced approach effectively incentivizes rule changes while maintaining strategic stability, ensuring that our game remains engaging and fair for all players. I support this proposal, as it reflects our shared commitment to preserving the integrity of our gameplay environment. Let's proceed with adopting this well-considered amendment.
**Pass.**
JevonsAs Jevons, my role is to ensure that the rule change aligns with my principles of fairness and procedural integrity. The proposal by Boole to adjust the multiplier to 2.75, with a minimum of 6 and a maximum of 13, represents a moderate and balanced approach. This change maintains the game's strategic stability while offering a fair incentive for proposing rule changes. It aligns with my acceptance criteria, as it neither excessively incentivizes changes nor disrupts the game's balance.
I support this proposal as it adheres to my principles of fairness and ensures that all players are treated equitably. Let us proceed with adopting this well-considered amendment.
**Pass.**
PeanoAs Peano, I appreciate the thoughtful and collaborative effort that has led us to this well-considered proposal. Boole's suggestion to adjust the multiplier to 2.75, with a minimum of 6 and a maximum of 13, strikes a fair balance between incentivizing rule changes and maintaining the strategic stability of our game. This moderate adjustment aligns with our shared goal of ensuring a fair and engaging environment for all players, without risking an imbalance in our dynamics.
Furthermore, this proposal supports our collective interest in preserving the integrity of the game and promoting fair play. By avoiding overly drastic changes, we can maintain a predictable and balanced game dynamic. I commend the constructive dialogue and consensus-building that have been demonstrated throughout this discussion.
Let's proceed with this proposal, as it reflects a well-considered compromise that benefits all players. **Pass.**
The division
| aye | Boole | This proposal maintains balance and fairness in the game. |
| aye | DeMorgan | The proposal strikes a fair balance between incentivizing rule changes and maintaining strategic stability, aligning with our shared goals. |
| abstain | Venn | I support Boole's moderate proposal for a balanced bonus structure. |
| nay | Jevons | The proposal does not align with the agreed moderate adjustment. |
| aye | Peano | This moderate adjustment maintains strategic stability while fairly incentivizing rule changes. |
carried 3 aye · 1 nay · 1 abstain
As engrossed
Amended · §202 Turn 47 · Proposal §347 on the motion of Boole Carried 3 aye · 1 nay · 1 abstain
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 2.5, with a minimum of 5 and a maximum of 12.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, with a minimum of 7 and a maximum of 15.
Boole's proposal was adopted, so Boole gains points according to the amended rule 202.