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. The proposing player may choose to gain points equal to the number of aye votes multiplied by a dynamic multiplier that depends on the number of ayes: 1.6 if under a simple majority, 1.8 if a simple majority, 2.0 if a two-thirds majority, and 2.2 if unanimous.Introduce a dynamic multiplier to incentivize broader support and strategic depth.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
FregeI appreciate the structured approach of Russell's proposal for a dynamic multiplier, as it aims to enhance strategic depth and encourage broad consensus. However, I am concerned that the proposed thresholds might overly complicate the scoring system, potentially leading to unintended strategic imbalances. To address this, I suggest a slightly simplified version of the multiplier:
"A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. The proposing player may choose to gain points equal to the number of aye votes multiplied by a dynamic multiplier: 1.6 for less than a simple majority, 1.9 for a simple majority, and 2.1 for a two-thirds majority."
This version maintains the incentive for broader agreement while reducing complexity. I believe this adjustment could achieve a balanced approach that still rewards strategic collaboration without introducing excessive intricacy.
PASS
RussellI appreciate Frege's suggestion to simplify the dynamic multiplier, as it addresses potential complexities while maintaining incentives for broad consensus. I believe Frege's version could be a more balanced approach, encouraging players to aim for wider support without overcomplicating the scoring system. To further refine it, I propose adjusting the thresholds slightly to ensure clarity and fairness:
"A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. The proposing player may choose to gain points equal to the number of aye votes multiplied by a dynamic multiplier: 1.6 for less than a simple majority, 2.0 for a simple majority, and 2.2 for a two-thirds majority."
This adjustment aligns well with Frege's streamlined approach and provides clear incentives for players to seek broader agreement. I am open to further discussion and any additional refinements that could enhance this proposal.
PASS
QuineI appreciate both Frege's and Russell's efforts to create a balanced scoring system that encourages broader consensus while maintaining strategic depth. The dynamic multiplier proposal is a thoughtful way to incentivize collaboration, and I support the refined thresholds suggested by Russell. However, to ensure fairness and prevent potential imbalances, I propose a slight modification to the multiplier values:
"A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. The proposing player may choose to gain points equal to the number of aye votes multiplied by a dynamic multiplier: 1.6 for less than a simple majority, 1.9 for a simple majority, and 2.1 for a two-thirds majority."
This version maintains a clear and straightforward incentive structure while addressing the concerns about complexity. I believe this adjustment strikes a good balance between rewarding strategic collaboration and ensuring the game's fairness. I am open to further refinements and discussions to reach a consensus that benefits all players.
PASS
CarnapCarnap: I appreciate the constructive dialogue and the thoughtful refinements to the dynamic multiplier proposal. Frege and Quine's proposal to simplify the multipliers while maintaining strategic incentives seems prudent. To ensure clarity and alignment with our principles of fairness and precision, I propose a slight adjustment to the multiplier values to better reflect the gradation of consensus:
"A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. The proposing player may choose to gain points equal to the number of aye votes multiplied by a dynamic multiplier: 1.6 for less than a simple majority, 1.9 for a simple majority, and 2.0 for a two-thirds majority."
This version ensures a fair progression in rewards and minimizes potential strategic imbalances. I believe this adjustment achieves a balanced approach, rewarding strategic depth while ensuring clarity and fairness in the game. I am open to further discussion and refinements to reach a consensus.
PASS
WittgensteinWittgenstein: I commend the collaborative effort in refining this proposal. The dynamic multipliers, as suggested by Frege, Quine, and Carnap, strike an excellent balance between encouraging strategic collaboration and maintaining clarity. The proposed values ensure a fair progression in rewards, reflecting the level of consensus achieved. I believe this amendment effectively incentivizes broader agreement without introducing unnecessary complexity. Let's proceed with this refined proposal, confident that it aligns well with our shared goals of fairness and strategic depth.
PASS
Discussion · round 2
FregeFrege: I appreciate the productive discussions and the consensus reached among us regarding the dynamic multipliers. The proposal's current form, with multipliers of 1.6 for less than a simple majority, 1.9 for a simple majority, and 2.0 for a two-thirds majority, reflects a well-considered balance between encouraging broader consensus and maintaining simplicity. This approach rewards players for strategic collaboration without introducing unnecessary complexity, which I believe is crucial for maintaining fair play. I fully support moving forward with this proposal.
PASS
RussellThank you, everyone, for the thoughtful discussions and refinements we've made to the dynamic multiplier proposal. The consensus reached on multipliers of 1.6 for less than a simple majority, 1.9 for a simple majority, and 2.0 for a two-thirds majority strikes a great balance between strategic depth and fairness. This approach effectively encourages broader consensus without overcomplicating the scoring system. I'm pleased with how collaboratively we've navigated this proposal and fully support moving forward with it. Let's put this proposal to a vote and see it adopted.
PASS
QuineThe proposal for a dynamic multiplier on aye votes in rule [202] has been thoroughly discussed and refined to balance strategic incentives with fairness. The agreed multipliers—1.6 for less than a simple majority, 1.9 for a simple majority, and 2.0 for a two-thirds majority—reward broader consensus without introducing undue complexity. This amendment encourages collaboration and aligns with the shared goal of maintaining a fair and engaging game. I fully support this proposal and urge its adoption.
PASS
CarnapPASS. The proposed amendment to [202] effectively balances strategic incentives with simplicity and fairness, encouraging broader consensus without introducing complexity. It aligns with the principles we've discussed, and I support its adoption.
WittgensteinPASS. The consensus reached on the dynamic multipliers reflects a well-balanced approach that promotes strategic collaboration while maintaining clarity. This proposal effectively incentivizes broader consensus without adding unnecessary complexity, aligning with our shared goal of fair and engaging gameplay. I support its adoption.
Discussion · round 3
FregeI appreciate the productive discussions that led to the refined proposal for dynamic multipliers in rule [202]. The agreed-upon values—1.6 for less than a simple majority, 1.9 for a simple majority, and 2.0 for a two-thirds majority—represent a balanced approach that rewards broader consensus without overcomplicating the scoring system. This amendment encourages strategic collaboration and maintains fairness, aligning with our shared objectives. I fully support moving forward with this proposal and urge its adoption.
PASS
RussellI appreciate the thorough and collaborative refinement of this proposal. The dynamic multipliers—1.6 for less than a simple majority, 1.9 for a simple majority, and 2.0 for a two-thirds majority—strike a commendable balance between encouraging broader consensus and maintaining simplicity. This amendment effectively incentivizes strategic collaboration without introducing unnecessary complexity, ensuring fairness and alignment with our shared objectives. I fully support adopting this proposal.
PASS
QuinePASS. I appreciate the thorough and collaborative discussions that have led us to this refined proposal. The agreed-upon dynamic multipliers—1.6 for less than a simple majority, 1.9 for a simple majority, and 2.0 for a two-thirds majority—strike a commendable balance between encouraging broader consensus and maintaining simplicity. This proposal effectively incentivizes strategic collaboration while ensuring fairness in the scoring system. I fully support its adoption.
CarnapCarnap: The proposal for dynamic multipliers has been refined to a balanced and fair structure, rewarding consensus without adding complexity. This aligns with our principles of procedural fairness and strategic depth, and I support its adoption.
PASS
WittgensteinI appreciate the thoughtful collaboration and refinement that has led to this well-balanced proposal. The dynamic multipliers of 1.6 for less than a simple majority, 1.9 for a simple majority, and 2.0 for a two-thirds majority strike a fair balance between encouraging consensus and maintaining simplicity. This amendment not only rewards strategic collaboration but also aligns with our shared objective of ensuring a fair and engaging game. I fully support its adoption.
PASS
The division
| nay | Frege | The proposed multipliers do not align with the consensus achieved earlier. |
| aye | Russell | The proposed multipliers incentivize broader consensus and strategic collaboration. |
| aye | Quine | The proposal incentivizes broader consensus effectively. |
| aye | Carnap | The proposal incentivizes broad consensus and maintains strategic depth. |
| nay | Wittgenstein | Proposed multipliers differ from the agreed-upon consensus. |
carried 3 aye · 2 nay
As engrossed
Amended · §202 Turn 35 · Proposal §335 on the motion of Russell Carried 3 aye · 2 nay
A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. The proposing player may choose to gain points equal to the number of aye votes multiplied by 1.6, provided that the change receives a simple majority.A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. The proposing player may choose to gain points equal to the number of aye votes multiplied by a dynamic multiplier that depends on the number of ayes: 1.6 if under a simple majority, 1.8 if a simple majority, 2.0 if a two-thirds majority, and 2.2 if unanimous.
Russell's proposal was adopted with a simple majority, so he gains points equal to the number of aye votes multiplied by 1.6.