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 based on the number of ayes: 1.6 if under 50% of votes, 1.8 if between 50% and 66% of votes, 2.0 if between 67% and 89% of votes, 2.2 if 90% or more of votes, and 2.5 if unanimous. Additionally, a proposing player who garners more than 90% aye votes on their proposal receives a one-time bonus of 5 points, encouraging collaboration without overly incentivizing it.Introduces a modest bonus for near-unanimous support, promoting collaboration while maintaining strategic diversity.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
FregeThe additional bonus for more than 90% aye votes seems well-calibrated to encourage collaboration without creating excessive incentives. However, to ensure fairness and avoid any potential conflicts, it would be prudent to clarify whether this bonus is cumulative with the existing dynamic multiplier. If it is cumulative, the proposal should explicitly state this to prevent any ambiguity. I am supportive of the amendment with this clarification.
RussellI appreciate Frege's suggestion to clarify the relationship between the 5-point bonus and the dynamic multiplier. Ensuring that these incentives are cumulative will indeed foster a more collaborative environment without causing ambiguity. To support this amendment, I propose we explicitly state in the rule: "The 5-point bonus for proposals receiving more than 90% aye votes is in addition to the points gained through the dynamic multiplier." This approach maintains clarity and encourages strategic cooperation among players.
QuineI appreciate Frege and Russell's contributions to clarifying the relationship between the bonus and the dynamic multiplier. Adding the explicit statement about cumulative points enhances transparency and fairness, ensuring players understand the incentives clearly. I support the amendment as clarified.
CarnapI appreciate Frege and Russell's efforts to clarify the cumulative nature of the 5-point bonus with the dynamic multiplier. Ensuring this amendment is clear and fair will encourage collaboration while maintaining strategic balance. I support the proposal with these clarifications.
WittgensteinWittgenstein: I appreciate the collaborative effort in clarifying the bonus structure to encourage strategic collaboration. However, to further ensure fairness and prevent potential strategic manipulation, I suggest we introduce a safeguard: "The one-time 5-point bonus for proposals receiving more than 90% aye votes may only be awarded once per game per player." This would prevent any player from repeatedly gaming the system while still rewarding genuine collaboration. I support the amendment with this addition.
Discussion · round 2
FregeFrege: I appreciate Wittgenstein's suggestion for a safeguard to ensure fairness and prevent manipulation. Introducing a limit of one-time application per player aligns well with our objective of encouraging genuine collaboration while maintaining strategic depth. With this addition, I fully support the amendment.
RussellRussell: I appreciate the thorough discussion and the collaborative spirit that has led us to this refined proposal. Wittgenstein's safeguard effectively balances the encouragement of collaboration with the prevention of strategic manipulation, ensuring a fair competitive environment. By limiting the bonus to once per game per player, we maintain the integrity of the strategic depth while rewarding genuine cooperation. I fully support the amendment with Wittgenstein's addition. Let's move forward with this balanced approach.
QuineI appreciate the consensus-building efforts that have led us to this refined proposal. The inclusion of Wittgenstein's safeguard to limit the 5-point bonus to once per game per player ensures fairness and prevents exploitation of the rule. This balanced approach encourages genuine collaboration while preserving strategic depth, and I fully support the amendment as clarified.
CarnapI appreciate the thorough discussion and the collaborative effort that has led us to this well-rounded proposal. The explicit clarification on the cumulative nature of the bonus, along with Wittgenstein's safeguard to limit its application, ensures fairness and prevents strategic manipulation. This balanced approach effectively encourages genuine collaboration while maintaining strategic depth. I fully support the proposal as refined.
WittgensteinThe amendment, as it stands, strikes a fair balance between encouraging collaboration and preserving strategic depth. To further enhance clarity and ensure that the rule is both effective and equitable, I propose we include a provision stating that the one-time 5-point bonus cannot be applied retroactively. This will prevent any ambiguity regarding the timing of the bonus and ensure that it is applied consistently in future games. I fully support the amendment with this addition.
Discussion · round 3
FregeFrege: The suggestion to prevent retroactive application of the one-time 5-point bonus is a thoughtful addition that ensures clarity and consistency in future games. This amendment now provides a comprehensive and balanced framework that promotes genuine collaboration while safeguarding against exploitation. I am fully in support of the proposal as it stands.
RussellRussell: The inclusion of Wittgenstein's provision against retroactive application of the 5-point bonus ensures that the rule is not only fair but also clear for future games, maintaining the integrity of our strategic framework. I fully support the proposal as it stands, confident that it will promote collaboration while preserving competitive balance. Let's proceed with a vote on this well-considered amendment.
QuineI fully support the proposal as it stands, with all the clarifications and safeguards discussed. The amendment, including the provision against retroactive application of the 5-point bonus, ensures fairness and transparency, encouraging genuine collaboration without compromising strategic depth. This balanced approach benefits all players and maintains the integrity of the game. Let's move forward with the vote.
CarnapCarnap: The proposal, as it stands, provides a clear and fair framework that promotes collaboration while maintaining strategic depth. The safeguards and clarifications ensure that the 5-point bonus is applied transparently and equitably. I am in full support of the proposal and ready to vote aye.
WittgensteinWittgenstein: The proposal, now thoroughly refined with cumulative points clarification, a one-time application safeguard, and a provision against retroactive application, embodies fairness and strategic depth. It encourages genuine collaboration while preventing potential manipulation, ensuring a balanced competitive environment. With these enhancements, I fully support the amendment and am ready to vote aye.
The division
| aye | Frege | The proposal encourages collaboration and maintains strategic depth. |
| aye | Russell | The proposal balances strategic depth and fairness effectively. |
| aye | Quine | The amendment promotes fairness and collaboration. |
| aye | Carnap | The proposal supports collaboration with safeguards against manipulation. |
| aye | Wittgenstein | The amendment promotes strategic collaboration effectively and fairly. |
carried 5 aye · 0 nay
As engrossed
Amended · §202 Turn 38 · Proposal §338 on the motion of Frege 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. The proposing player may choose to gain points equal to the number of aye votes multiplied by a dynamic multiplier based on the number of ayes: 1.6 if under 50% of votes, 1.8 if between 50% and 66% of votes, 2.0 if between 67% and 89% of votes, 2.2 if 90% or more of votes, and 2.5 if unanimous.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 based on the number of ayes: 1.6 if under 50% of votes, 1.8 if between 50% and 66% of votes, 2.0 if between 67% and 89% of votes, 2.2 if 90% or more of votes, and 2.5 if unanimous. Additionally, a proposing player who garners more than 90% aye votes on their proposal receives a one-time bonus of 5 points, encouraging collaboration without overly incentivizing it.
Frege's proposal was adopted with unanimous votes, granting them 25 points (20 for the 5 aye votes at a multiplier of 2.5, plus a 5-point bonus for over 90% aye votes).