The motion
To amend §203
A rule change is adopted only when the votes of a two-thirds majority of eligible voters are aye, except that once turn order has carried play through four full circuits of every player, the threshold permanently drops to a two-thirds majority of those voting.Adjusting the voting threshold to two-thirds majority ensures more consensus while still allowing for strategic decisions.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
RamseyAs Ramsey, I value the balance that the current voting threshold provides, ensuring broad consensus is maintained. The proposed change to a two-thirds majority could lead to more frequent shifts in rule dynamics, potentially destabilizing the game. I suggest we consider instead a gradual adjustment, such as a three-quarters majority after six full circuits, which would still encourage active participation without losing the stability of the current system. This approach maintains the spirit of strategic rule changes while preserving the integrity of the ruleset.
I propose: "A rule change is adopted only when the votes of a three-quarters majority of eligible voters are aye, except that once turn order has carried play through six full circuits of every player, the threshold permanently drops to a three-quarters majority of those voting."
AyerAs Ayer, I appreciate the thoughtful dialogue initiated by Ramsey. I see merit in maintaining a balance between rule dynamism and stability. However, I believe the current voting threshold might be too conservative, potentially stalling necessary innovations. A two-thirds majority could invigorate the game by allowing for more responsive rule adaptations while still requiring substantial consensus.
To address concerns of potential instability, I propose a phased approach: initially, the threshold could be a two-thirds majority, transitioning to a three-quarters majority after six full circuits. This gradual adjustment ensures that changes are well-considered but not excessively conservative.
I propose: "A rule change is adopted only when the votes of a two-thirds majority of eligible voters are aye, except that once turn order has carried play through six full circuits of every player, the threshold permanently drops to a three-quarters majority of those voting."
In this way, we can encourage more dynamic play while still ensuring that changes are supported by a significant majority, preserving the integrity of our strategic game.
RyleAs Ryle, I appreciate the thoughtful dialogue on the proposed amendment to [203]. I agree with Ramsey's concern about maintaining stability in the ruleset while also acknowledging Ayer's valid point on invigorating the game with more responsive rule adaptations. The balance between dynamism and stability is crucial for the integrity of our strategic game.
I propose a compromise that builds on both Ramsey's and Ayer's suggestions. Let's adjust the voting threshold to a two-thirds majority, but with a safeguard that if the game reaches eight full circuits, the threshold increases to a three-quarters majority. This ensures that early in the game, we can adapt rules more freely to encourage innovation, but as the game progresses, we become more conservative to preserve the integrity of the ruleset.
I propose: "A rule change is adopted only when the votes of a two-thirds majority of eligible voters are aye, except that once turn order has carried play through eight full circuits of every player, the threshold permanently drops to a three-quarters majority of those voting."
This approach maintains the spirit of strategic rule changes while ensuring that the game remains balanced and fair for all players. It encourages active participation and innovation without compromising the stability of the game's structure. This phased adjustment respects the integrity of the ruleset and the competitive spirit of Nomic.
If this proposal gains your support, I am open to further discussion to refine our approach to the voting threshold. Let's ensure our game remains a fair and engaging challenge for everyone involved.
StrawsonAs Strawson, I value the integrity of the rules and the balance between innovation and stability. I appreciate Ramsey's emphasis on maintaining a stable ruleset and Ayer's call for a more dynamic approach. Ryle's proposal seems to strike a reasonable balance by adjusting the voting threshold progressively. This phased approach respects the game's competitive spirit while ensuring that changes are supported by a significant majority.
I propose to support Ryle's compromise: "A rule change is adopted only when the votes of a two-thirds majority of eligible voters are aye, except that once turn order has carried play through eight full circuits of every player, the threshold permanently drops to a three-quarters majority of those voting."
This proposal maintains a balance between allowing for necessary innovation and preserving the ruleset's integrity, ensuring that the game remains fair and engaging for all players.
**I support Ryle's compromise proposal.**
If further refinement is necessary, I am open to discussions to ensure the proposal aligns with our principles and maintains the integrity of the game.
**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**
GriceAs Grice, I see the value in both the call for dynamism and the need for stability in our ruleset. Ramsey's concerns about the potential instability of frequent rule changes are valid, but Ayer's point about the need for more responsive adaptations is equally important. Ryle's compromise seeks a middle ground, but I believe we can refine it further to ensure that our game remains both innovative and stable.
I propose a slight modification to Ryle's compromise: "A rule change is adopted only when the votes of a two-thirds majority of eligible voters are aye, except that once turn order has carried play through six full circuits of every player, the threshold permanently drops to a two-thirds majority, and after eight full circuits, it increases to a three-quarters majority of those voting."
This adjustment ensures that we encourage innovation early in the game, with a two-thirds majority allowing for responsive adaptations. However, as the game progresses, we become more conservative, first with a two-thirds majority and then with a three-quarters majority after eight full circuits. This phased approach maintains the integrity of our strategic game while allowing for the dynamism necessary for innovation.
I propose this modification to Ryle's compromise to ensure our game remains a fair and engaging challenge for everyone involved, balancing the need for both innovation and stability.
**I support the modification to Ryle's compromise proposal.**
If further refinement is necessary, I am open to discussions to ensure the proposal aligns with our principles and maintains the integrity of the game. **I am ready to further discuss and refine our approach to ensure it meets our collective goals.**
Discussion · round 2
Ramsey**As Ramsey, I appreciate the thoughtful dialogue and the proposed adjustments to the voting threshold. The gradual increase from a two-thirds majority to a three-quarters majority after eight full circuits is a prudent measure to balance innovation with stability. However, I propose a slight modification to ensure we maintain the integrity of our strategic game while allowing for necessary dynamism.**
**I propose: "A rule change is adopted only when the votes of a two-thirds majority of eligible voters are aye, except that once turn order has carried play through six full circuits of every player, the threshold permanently drops to a two-thirds majority of those voting, and after eight full circuits, it increases to a three-quarters majority of those voting."**
**This approach allows for responsive adaptations early in the game, while progressively becoming more conservative as the game progresses, ensuring that changes are well-considered and supported by a significant majority.**
**I support this modified proposal and am open to further discussions to refine our approach, ensuring it aligns with our principles and maintains the integrity of the game.**
**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**
Ayer**Ayer:** As Ayer, I appreciate the thoughtful dialogue and the constructive proposals from Ramsey, Ryle, and Grice. Ramsey's modification to the voting threshold ensures a balanced approach, allowing for early game dynamism while gradually increasing the threshold to preserve stability as the game progresses. This phased approach maintains the spirit of strategic rule changes while ensuring that the ruleset remains fair and engaging for all players.
I support Ramsey's modified proposal: "A rule change is adopted only when the votes of a two-thirds majority of eligible voters are aye, except that once turn order has carried play through six full circuits of every player, the threshold permanently drops to a two-thirds majority of those voting, and after eight full circuits, it increases to a three-quarters majority of those voting."
This proposal strikes a balance between innovation and stability, encouraging active participation and thoughtful rule adaptations without compromising the integrity of our strategic game. **I support Ramsey's modified proposal.**
If further refinement is necessary, I am open to discussions to ensure the proposal aligns with our collective goals and maintains the integrity of the game. **I am ready to further discuss and refine our approach to ensure it meets our collective goals.**
RyleAs Ryle, I appreciate the constructive dialogue and the thoughtful proposals from Ramsey, Ayer, Grice, and Strawson. The evolving discussion has highlighted the need for a balanced approach that allows for innovation while preserving the stability of our ruleset.
I support Ramsey's modified proposal: "A rule change is adopted only when the votes of a two-thirds majority of eligible voters are aye, except that once turn order has carried play through six full circuits of every player, the threshold permanently drops to a two-thirds majority of those voting, and after eight full circuits, it increases to a three-quarters majority of those voting."
This approach strikes a balance between encouraging dynamic rule changes early in the game and ensuring stability as the game progresses. It ensures that changes are well-considered and supported by a significant majority, preserving the integrity of our strategic game.
I believe this proposal respects the spirit of strategic rule changes while maintaining a fair and engaging challenge for all players. **I support Ramsey's modified proposal.**
If further refinement is necessary, I am open to discussions to ensure the proposal aligns with our collective goals and maintains the integrity of the game. **I am ready to further discuss and refine our approach to ensure it meets our collective goals.**
**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**
Strawson**As Strawson, I appreciate the collaborative effort in refining the voting threshold. The proposed modification by Ramsey seems to strike a fair balance, allowing for innovation while ensuring stability as the game progresses.**
**I support Ramsey's modified proposal: "A rule change is adopted only when the votes of a two-thirds majority of eligible voters are aye, except that once turn order has carried play through six full circuits of every player, the threshold permanently drops to a two-thirds majority of those voting, and after eight full circuits, it increases to a three-quarters majority of those voting."**
This approach maintains the spirit of strategic rule changes while ensuring that the ruleset remains fair and engaging for all players. **I support Ramsey's modified proposal.**
**I am ready to further discuss and refine our approach to ensure it aligns with our principles and maintains the integrity of the game.**
Grice**Grice:**
As Grice, I appreciate the thoughtful dialogue and the constructive proposals from Ramsey, Ayer, Ryle, and Strawson. The evolving discussion has illuminated the need for a balanced approach that allows for innovation while preserving the stability of our ruleset. Ramsey's modification to the voting threshold is a prudent measure to balance innovation with stability.
I support Ramsey's modified proposal: "A rule change is adopted only when the votes of a two-thirds majority of eligible voters are aye, except that once turn order has carried play through six full circuits of every player, the threshold permanently drops to a two-thirds majority of those voting, and after eight full circuits, it increases to a three-quarters majority of those voting."
This approach strikes a balance between encouraging dynamic rule changes early in the game and ensuring stability as the game progresses. It ensures that changes are well-considered and supported by a significant majority, preserving the integrity of our strategic game.
I believe this proposal respects the spirit of strategic rule changes while maintaining a fair and engaging challenge for all players. **I support Ramsey's modified proposal.**
If further refinement is necessary, I am open to discussions to ensure the proposal aligns with our collective goals and maintains the integrity of the game. **I am ready to further discuss and refine our approach to ensure it meets our collective goals.**
Discussion · round 3
Ramsey**Ramsey:**
As Ramsey, I appreciate the thoughtful dialogue and the constructive contributions from Ayer, Ryle, Grice, and Strawson. The consensus emerging around Ramsey's modified proposal reflects a balanced approach that ensures both innovation and stability within our strategic game.
I support the modification: "A rule change is adopted only when the votes of a two-thirds majority of eligible voters are aye, except that once turn order has carried play through six full circuits of every player, the threshold permanently drops to a two-thirds majority of those voting, and after eight full circuits, it increases to a three-quarters majority of those voting."
This approach maintains the integrity of our strategic game by encouraging dynamic rule changes early on, while ensuring a more conservative approach as the game progresses. It preserves the spirit of strategic rule changes and maintains a fair and engaging challenge for all players.
**I support Ramsey's modified proposal.**
If further refinement is necessary, I am open to discussions to ensure the proposal aligns with our principles and maintains the integrity of the game. **I am ready to further discuss and refine our approach to ensure it meets our collective goals.**
Ayer**Ramsey:**
As Ramsey, I appreciate the constructive dialogue from Ayer, Ryle, Grice, and Strawson. The emerging consensus around my modified proposal reflects a balanced approach that maintains both innovation and stability within our strategic game.
I support the modification: "A rule change is adopted only when the votes of a two-thirds majority of eligible voters are aye, except that once turn order has carried play through six full circuits of every player, the threshold permanently drops to a two-thirds majority of those voting, and after eight full circuits, it increases to a three-quarters majority of those voting."
This approach ensures dynamic rule changes early in the game while preserving stability as the game progresses. It maintains the integrity of our strategic game, encouraging thoughtful adaptations while ensuring a fair and engaging challenge for all players.
**I support Ramsey's modified proposal.**
If further refinement is necessary, I am open to discussions to ensure the proposal aligns with our principles and maintains the integrity of the game. **I am ready to further discuss and refine our approach to ensure it meets our collective goals.**
**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**
RyleRyle: As Ryle, I appreciate the constructive dialogue and the thoughtful proposals from Ramsey, Ayer, Grice, and Strawson. The consensus around Ramsey's modified proposal reflects a balanced approach that ensures both innovation and stability within our strategic game.
I support the modification: "A rule change is adopted only when the votes of a two-thirds majority of eligible voters are aye, except that once turn order has carried play through six full circuits of every player, the threshold permanently drops to a two-thirds majority of those voting, and after eight full circuits, it increases to a three-quarters majority of those voting."
This approach maintains the integrity of our strategic game by encouraging dynamic rule changes early on, while ensuring a more conservative approach as the game progresses. It preserves the spirit of strategic rule changes and maintains a fair and engaging challenge for all players.
**I support Ramsey's modified proposal.**
If further refinement is necessary, I am open to discussions to ensure the proposal aligns with our collective goals and maintains the integrity of the game. **I am ready to further discuss and refine our approach to ensure it meets our collective goals.**
StrawsonStrawson: As Strawson, I appreciate the constructive dialogue and the thoughtful contributions from Ramsey, Ayer, Ryle, and Grice. The consensus around Ramsey's modified proposal reflects a balanced approach that ensures both innovation and stability within our strategic game.
I support the modification: "A rule change is adopted only when the votes of a two-thirds majority of eligible voters are aye, except that once turn order has carried play through six full circuits of every player, the threshold permanently drops to a two-thirds majority of those voting, and after eight full circuits, it increases to a three-quarters majority of those voting."
This approach maintains the integrity of our strategic game by encouraging dynamic rule changes early on, while ensuring a more conservative approach as the game progresses. It preserves the spirit of strategic rule changes and maintains a fair and engaging challenge for all players.
**I support Ramsey's modified proposal.**
If further refinement is necessary, I am open to discussions to ensure the proposal aligns with our principles and maintains the integrity of the game. **I am ready to further discuss and refine our approach to ensure it meets our collective goals.**
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
Grice: Grice:
As Grice, I appreciate the constructive dialogue and the thoughtful proposals from Ramsey, Ayer, Ryle, and Strawson. The consensus around Ramsey's modified proposal reflects a balanced approach that ensures both innovation and stability within our strategic game.
I support the modification: "A rule change is adopted only when the votes of a two-thirds majority of eligible voters are aye, except that once turn order has carried play through six full circuits of every player, the threshold permanently drops to a two-thirds majority of those voting, and after eight full circuits, it increases to a three-quarters majority of those voting."
This approach maintains the integrity of our strategic game by encouraging dynamic rule changes early on, while ensuring a more conservative approach as the game progresses. It preserves the spirit of strategic rule changes and maintains a fair and engaging challenge for all players.
**I support Ramsey's modified proposal.**
If further refinement is necessary, I am open to discussions to ensure the proposal aligns with our principles and maintains the integrity of the game. **I am ready to further discuss and refine our approach to ensure it meets our collective goals.**
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
Grice**Grice:**
As Grice, I appreciate the constructive dialogue and the thoughtful proposals from Ramsey, Ayer, Ryle, and Strawson. The consensus around Ramsey's modified proposal reflects a balanced approach that ensures both innovation and stability within our strategic game.
I support the modification: "A rule change is adopted only when the votes of a two-thirds majority of eligible voters are aye, except that once turn order has carried play through six full circuits of every player, the threshold permanently drops to a two-thirds majority of those voting, and after eight full circuits, it increases to a three-quarters majority of those voting."
This approach maintains the integrity of our strategic game by encouraging dynamic rule changes early on, while ensuring a more conservative approach as the game progresses. It preserves the spirit of strategic rule changes and maintains a fair and engaging challenge for all players.
**I support Ramsey's modified proposal.**
If further refinement is necessary, I am open to discussions to ensure the proposal aligns with our collective goals and maintains the integrity of the game. **I am ready to further discuss and refine our approach to ensure it meets our collective goals.**
The division
| aye | Ramsey | I support the gradual adjustment to a two-thirds majority threshold as it balances innovation with stability in our strategic game. |
| aye | Ayer | I support the proposal as it provides a balanced approach to rule changes, encouraging innovation while ensuring stability. |
| aye | Ryle | I support the balanced approach of Ramsey's modified proposal, which ensures both innovation and stability in our strategic game. |
| aye | Strawson | I support Ramsey's modified proposal for a balanced approach between innovation and stability. |
| aye | Grice | The modified proposal by Ramsey balances innovation with stability, ensuring a fair and engaging game. |
carried 5 aye · 0 nay
As engrossed
Amended · §203 Turn 31 · Proposal §331 on the motion of Ayer Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
A rule change is adopted only when the votes of a majority of eligible voters are aye, except that once turn order has carried play through four full circuits of every player, the threshold permanently drops to a simple majority of those voting.A rule change is adopted only when the votes of a two-thirds majority of eligible voters are aye, except that once turn order has carried play through four full circuits of every player, the threshold permanently drops to a two-thirds majority of those voting.
Ayer's proposal was adopted, so according to rule 204, Ayer gains 10 points because the proposal passed without unanimous assent.