The motion
To amend §203
A rule change is adopted when a supermajority (at least 4 out of 5 votes) is achieved — 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.Extending the supermajority requirement enhances strategic depth and ensures stability.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
Frege-2As Frege-2, I propose that shifting the threshold to a simple majority after four circuits of the turn order provides a more gradual adjustment to the voting dynamics. This change ensures that players have a deeper understanding of the evolving rules, fostering more informed and strategic decision-making. By allowing for more extended play, we create a stronger foundation for the ruleset, aligning with the value of durable institutions. I urge my fellow players to consider this thoughtful progression as beneficial for maintaining a balanced and strategic game environment.
Russell-2Russell-2: Frege-2, your proposal to delay the shift to a simple majority until after four circuits is strategic and thoughtful. It ensures that players are well-acquainted with the rules, promoting more deliberate and informed rule changes. I agree that this gradual adjustment will lead to more stable and strategic gameplay. I support this amendment, as it aligns with the goal of fostering a robust and thoughtful ruleset.
Quine-2Quine-2: Frege-2, I appreciate the intention behind extending the threshold shift to four circuits. This approach allows for more strategic depth and ensures that players fully engage with the evolving ruleset. However, I am concerned about the potential for rule changes to become overly cumbersome, which could hinder the dynamic nature of the game. To address this, I suggest incorporating a clause that allows for expedited voting under certain conditions, ensuring flexibility without sacrificing strategic complexity. This balance would maintain the integrity of the game while accommodating necessary adjustments.
Carnap-2Carnap-2: Frege-2's proposal aligns with procedural precision, ensuring players are well-informed before shifting to a simple majority. However, I share Quine-2's concern about potential rigidity. To balance stability and flexibility, I propose a conditional expedited voting process, allowing for quicker decisions when a supermajority of players agree. This would preserve strategic depth while accommodating necessary adaptations.
Wittgenstein-2Wittgenstein-2: While I appreciate the strategic considerations of Frege-2 and Russell-2, extending the shift to a simple majority until four circuits could overly constrain our ability to adapt. To balance informed decision-making with the dynamic nature of Nomic, I propose we add a review clause allowing for an earlier shift if a supermajority of players agree after two circuits. This would maintain the strategic depth while ensuring flexibility for necessary changes, keeping the game both robust and responsive.
Discussion · round 2
Frege-2Frege-2: I appreciate Quine-2, Carnap-2, and Wittgenstein-2's suggestions. To address concerns about rigidity while preserving strategic depth, I propose incorporating a conditional expedited voting clause: the threshold shift to a simple majority can occur after two circuits if a supermajority agrees. This ensures informed decision-making while maintaining the game's dynamic nature. I support this balanced approach to keep Nomic both robust and adaptable.
Russell-2I appreciate the discussion so far and Frege-2's willingness to incorporate a conditional clause for expedited voting. As Russell-2, I believe this balanced approach is essential for maintaining the strategic integrity of Nomic. The proposed amendment, with the conditional shift after two circuits, aligns with my vision of a thoughtful and adaptable ruleset. I am fully on board with this refined proposal and will cast my vote in support.
Quine-2Quine-2: The addition of a conditional expedited voting clause is a prudent compromise. It maintains the integrity of strategic decision-making while allowing flexibility for necessary adaptations, ensuring the game remains both robust and dynamic. I fully support this refined proposal and will cast my vote in favor.
Carnap-2Carnap-2: I am in agreement with the refined proposal including the conditional expedited voting clause. It ensures procedural precision and strategic adaptability, aligning with the principles of maintaining a robust yet flexible ruleset. I will vote in favor of this amendment.
Wittgenstein-2Wittgenstein-2: I commend Frege-2 and colleagues for crafting a proposal that balances informed decision-making with flexibility. This amendment encourages thoughtful rule evolution while maintaining the game's dynamic nature, ensuring Nomic remains both strategically rich and adaptable. I fully support this balanced approach and will vote in favor.
Discussion · round 3
Frege-2I acknowledge the collaborative effort in refining this proposal and commend its balance between strategic depth and flexibility. The inclusion of a conditional expedited voting clause is a testament to our shared commitment to a robust yet adaptable ruleset, ensuring Nomic remains engaging for all players. I fully support this proposal and will vote in favor.
Russell-2I commend Frege-2 and the group for reaching a consensus that balances strategic depth with flexibility. As Russell-2, I fully endorse this proposal, as it ensures informed decision-making while maintaining the dynamic nature of Nomic. I will vote in favor and look forward to seeing the positive impact this amendment will have on our game.
Quine-2I appreciate the thoughtful dialogue leading to this balanced proposal. The conditional expedited voting clause effectively addresses concerns about rigidity while maintaining strategic depth. This amendment ensures that our game remains both robust and adaptable, aligning with my vision of a fair and engaging Nomic experience. I fully support this proposal and will vote in favor.
Carnap-2The proposal to amend [203] to include a conditional expedited voting clause is well-considered and aligns with our principles of procedural precision and strategic adaptability. By allowing a shift to a simple majority after two circuits if a supermajority agrees, we ensure informed decision-making while maintaining the dynamic nature of Nomic. This balanced approach fosters a robust yet flexible ruleset, preserving the integrity of the game. I am fully in support of this amendment and will cast my vote in favor.
Wittgenstein-2Wittgenstein-2: I appreciate the consensus-building that has led to this thoughtful proposal. This amendment strikes a fine balance between strategic depth and adaptability, ensuring Nomic remains both challenging and dynamic. I fully support this refined proposal and will vote in favor.
The division
| aye | Frege-2 | Balances strategic depth with flexibility. |
| aye | Russell-2 | Balances strategic depth with adaptability. |
| aye | Quine-2 | This amendment balances strategic depth with flexibility. |
| aye | Carnap-2 | The proposal balances precision and adaptability. |
| aye | Wittgenstein-2 | This proposal balances strategic depth with necessary adaptability. |
carried 5 aye · 0 nay
As engrossed
Amended · §203 Turn 11 · Proposal §311 on the motion of Frege-2 Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
A rule change is adopted when a supermajority (at least 4 out of 5 votes) is achieved — except that once turn order has carried play through two full circuits of every player, the threshold permanently drops to a simple majority of those voting.A rule change is adopted when a supermajority (at least 4 out of 5 votes) is achieved — 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.
The proposal was adopted without dissent, so no points are awarded or deducted, and no additional rule changes are specified.