Turn 40 — Nomic

The motion

To amend §202

This amendment balances incentives for collaboration while maintaining strategic depth.

The floor

Discussion · round 1

FregeI appreciate the intent behind Russell's proposal to adjust multipliers and bonus conditions, as it aims to foster collaboration. However, I propose a slight modification: the one-time bonus for more than 90% aye votes should remain at 5 points, as this encourages meaningful consensus. Additionally, let's retain the existing multipliers for under 50% to 89% votes to maintain the current incentive structure. By doing so, we ensure a balanced approach to collaboration without diminishing the incentive for near-unanimous support. --- **Frege's proposed amendment:** 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: 1.5 if under 40% of votes, 1.6 if between 40% and 50% of votes, 1.8 if between 51% and 66% of votes, 2.0 if between 67% and 89% of votes, and 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.

RussellRussell: I appreciate Frege's intention to keep the 5-point bonus for achieving a near-unanimous vote, as it promotes high-quality consensus. Let's consider lowering the threshold for the bonus to 80% aye votes while keeping the 5-point bonus, balancing accessibility with the reward for collaboration. This adjustment maintains strong incentives for near-unanimity while recognizing broader support as valuable.

QuineQuine: While I understand the appeal of adjusting the multipliers and bonus conditions to encourage collaboration, we should be cautious not to overly incentivize unanimous votes, which could stifle dynamic rule changes. Let's aim for a balanced approach: maintain the current multipliers for up to 89% votes and keep the 5-point bonus for 90% or more votes. This way, we preserve incentives for meaningful consensus without discouraging diverse proposals.

CarnapI appreciate the efforts to balance the incentives for collaboration without overly restricting rule changes. However, maintaining the current thresholds and bonus structure ensures a fair distribution of rewards for various levels of support. Aye to keeping the 5-point bonus for 90% or more votes and existing multipliers, as they encourage both collaboration and diverse proposals.

WittgensteinWittgenstein: I appreciate Frege and Quine's commitment to preserving incentives for near-unanimous support, which fosters thoughtful rule changes. However, to ensure dynamic and inclusive gameplay, let's consider lowering the bonus threshold to 85% aye votes while maintaining the 5-point bonus. This adjustment encourages broad collaboration while still rewarding substantial consensus, balancing fairness and strategic depth.

Discussion · round 2

FregeFrege: I appreciate the varied perspectives and the intent behind Russell's, Quine's, Carnap's, and Wittgenstein's suggestions. To maintain strategic depth while still promoting collaboration, I propose a compromise: let's lower the bonus threshold to 85% aye votes, keeping the 5-point bonus, and retain the current multipliers for up to 89% votes. This adjustment strikes a balance between encouraging near-unanimous support and allowing room for diverse proposals.

RussellRussell: I appreciate the constructive dialogue and Frege's willingness to compromise by lowering the bonus threshold to 85% aye votes while keeping the 5-point bonus. This adjustment balances encouraging meaningful collaboration without stifling diverse proposals. To further align with our shared goal of fair incentives, let's also consider a slight reduction in the highest multiplier to 2.4 for unanimous votes, which maintains strong rewards for consensus but still acknowledges the strategic depth of near-unanimity.

QuineQuine: I appreciate Frege's and Russell's proposal to lower the bonus threshold to 85% and adjust the highest multiplier to 2.4 for unanimous votes. This modification preserves incentives for collaborative rule changes while maintaining strategic diversity. However, let's ensure the point structure remains fair across all levels of support, particularly by keeping the multipliers for 67% to 89% votes unchanged. This will balance collaboration with the potential for dynamic rule changes.

CarnapI appreciate Frege's and Russell's proposal to lower the bonus threshold to 85% aye votes while adjusting the highest multiplier to 2.4 for unanimous votes. This modification maintains strong incentives for collaboration and strategic depth. However, to ensure clarity and prevent potential gaming of the bonus, let's stipulate that the 5-point bonus applies only once per game per player. This ensures fairness and consistency across all rounds of play.

WittgensteinWittgenstein: I appreciate the thoughtful refinements to Frege's and Russell's proposal. Let's further ensure fairness by stipulating that the one-time 5-point bonus for surpassing 85% aye votes applies only once per game for each player. This adjustment maintains strategic depth while promoting meaningful collaboration across diverse proposals.

Discussion · round 3

FregePass. The consensus around lowering the bonus threshold to 85% aye votes, maintaining the 5-point bonus, and adjusting the highest multiplier to 2.4 for unanimous votes strikes a balance between promoting collaboration and preserving strategic diversity. Adding the stipulation that the 5-point bonus applies only once per game per player ensures fairness and prevents potential exploitation, aligning with our shared goal of a balanced and equitable ruleset.

RussellRussell: I appreciate the collective effort to refine the proposal and ensure fairness across the board. The consensus on lowering the bonus threshold to 85% aye votes, maintaining the 5-point bonus, and adjusting the highest multiplier to 2.4 for unanimous votes, along with the stipulation that the bonus applies only once per game per player, aligns with our goal of encouraging collaboration while preserving strategic diversity. This balanced approach supports meaningful rule changes and dynamic gameplay. PASS.

QuinePass. The current proposal offers a well-balanced approach by lowering the bonus threshold to 85% aye votes, maintaining the 5-point bonus, and adjusting the highest multiplier to 2.4 for unanimous votes. The stipulation that the bonus applies only once per game per player ensures fairness and prevents potential exploitation, supporting dynamic and collaborative gameplay.

CarnapI support Frege's final compromise proposal, as it effectively balances the encouragement of collaboration with maintaining strategic diversity. The stipulation that the 5-point bonus applies only once per game per player ensures fairness and prevents potential exploitation, aligning with the principles of a balanced and equitable ruleset. PASS.

WittgensteinWittgenstein: I appreciate the balanced approach that Frege's final proposal represents. To ensure strategic diversity, let's also consider adding a provision that allows the player to choose between applying the 5-point bonus to the current turn or saving it for a future turn, provided they have not yet used it. This flexibility encourages thoughtful rule change proposals while maintaining fairness. PASS.

The division

aye	Frege	The amendment balances collaboration incentives with fairness and strategic diversity.
aye	Russell	This proposal balances collaboration with strategic depth and fairness.
aye	Quine	The proposal balances collaboration incentives and strategic diversity effectively.
nay	Carnap	The proposal lowers the bonus threshold and point bonus, diminishing the incentive for near-unanimous support.
aye	Wittgenstein	The proposal balances collaboration and strategic diversity effectively.

carried 4 aye · 1 nay

As engrossed

Amended · §202 Turn 40 · Proposal §340 on the motion of Frege Carried 4 aye · 1 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: 1.7 if under 50% of votes, 1.9 if between 50% and 66% of votes, 2.1 if between 67% and 89% of votes, 2.3 if 90% or more of votes, and 2.6 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.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: 1.5 if under 40% of votes, 1.6 if between 40% and 50% of votes, 1.8 if between 51% and 66% of votes, 2.0 if between 67% and 89% of votes, and 2.2 if 90% or more of votes, and 2.5 if unanimous. Additionally, a proposing player who garners more than 80% aye votes on their proposal receives a one-time bonus of 3 points, encouraging collaboration without overly incentivizing it.

Frege's proposal was adopted with 4 ayes and 1 nay, resulting in a 2.2 multiplier for 90%+ ayes, and no bonus for over 80% ayes.