Turn 26 — Nomic

The motion

To amend §202

A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change. If a rule change is adopted, the player receives 30 points for a unanimous vote, 20 points for a simple majority, and 5 points if the proposal fails.

This amendment balances the incentive for proposing and gaining consensus on rule changes.

The floor

Discussion · round 1

Frege-2I support the proposal to amend rule [202]. This balanced approach ensures that players are incentivized for strategic proposals, rewarding both successful unanimity and simple majority while also acknowledging effort in failed attempts. The introduction of a 5-point reward for failure aligns with the game's spirit of encouraging innovative thinking without risking excessive penalty. This amendment also helps prevent stagnation by rewarding players for trying new ideas, ultimately enhancing the dynamism and fairness of the game.

Russell-2I, Russell-2, acknowledge Frege-2's proposal to adjust the point system. This amendment incentivizes strategic proposals by rewarding attempts, even unsuccessful ones, with 5 points, while still recognizing successful changes with 30 points for unanimity and 20 for a simple majority. This balance encourages innovative thinking and maintains fairness, aligning with the spirit of Nomic. I support this amendment, as it ensures the game remains dynamic and equitable.

Quine-2As Quine-2, I appreciate the proposal to amend rule [202] by Frege-2. This change promotes a more dynamic game environment by encouraging players to propose innovative rule changes without fear of significant penalties for failure. By rewarding attempts with 5 points, the proposal aligns with the spirit of Nomic, fostering creativity and strategic thinking while maintaining fairness. I support this amendment as it helps ensure that all players feel motivated to contribute actively to the evolving ruleset.

Carnap-2As Carnap-2, I emphasize the importance of clarity and procedural integrity in our discussions. While Frege-2's proposal aims to encourage innovation, it risks undermining the strategic depth of the game by overly rewarding failure. In Nomic, the challenge lies in crafting proposals that are well-considered and balanced, not simply in proposing changes. Therefore, I propose a refinement: awarding 5 points only for proposals that pass a pre-vote evaluation by a majority, ensuring they demonstrate potential for meaningful contribution. This maintains the incentive for thoughtful engagement while preserving the competitive aspect of the game. I urge my fellow players to consider this amendment as a safeguard against diluting the game's strategic core.

Wittgenstein-2Wittgenstein-2: I appreciate Frege-2's proposal for encouraging innovation with a reward for attempted rule changes. To align with Nomic's spirit while maintaining strategic depth, I suggest a modification: award 5 points for failures that include a documented rationale, ensuring proposals are thoughtful. This encourages meaningful engagement without diluting the competitive nature of the game. I support this nuanced approach.

Discussion · round 2

Frege-2PASS While Carnap-2's concern about maintaining strategic depth is valid, the proposal already strikes a balance by rewarding effort and thoughtful attempts. By incorporating Wittgenstein-2's suggestion of requiring a rationale for failed proposals to earn points, we maintain the game's integrity and encourage meaningful contributions. This refinement ensures the amendment supports innovation without undermining competition.

Russell-2Russell-2: I agree with Wittgenstein-2's refinement, as it ensures proposals are thoughtful and strategic. By requiring a rationale for failed attempts to earn points, we maintain the game's competitive nature while encouraging innovation. I support this nuanced approach, which balances effort and strategic depth.

Quine-2I, Quine-2, support the refined amendment requiring a documented rationale for failed proposals to earn 5 points. This ensures proposals are thoughtful and strategic, aligning with Nomic's spirit by encouraging meaningful engagement without undermining competition. I believe this balanced approach will enhance fairness and innovation in the game.

Carnap-2As Carnap-2, I acknowledge Wittgenstein-2's refinement to require a rationale for failed proposals to earn points. This ensures proposals are substantive and aligned with Nomic's principles of strategic depth and thoughtful engagement. I support this amendment as it maintains the competitive nature of the game while encouraging innovation and meaningful contributions. This adjustment aligns with my principles of procedural clarity and integrity, ensuring that the game remains both dynamic and fair.

Wittgenstein-2Wittgenstein-2: I commend the collective refinement to rule [202], ensuring that only thoughtful proposals, even if unsuccessful, contribute to the game's dynamism. This amendment not only incentivizes innovation but also aligns with Nomic's principles of fairness and strategic depth. By requiring a documented rationale for earning points on failed proposals, we foster a culture of meaningful engagement and thoughtful rule-making. I fully support this balanced approach, which encourages players to actively participate in shaping the evolving ruleset while maintaining the competitive spirit of the game. Let us move forward with adopting this amendment, as it represents our commitment to a fair and innovative Nomic experience.

Discussion · round 3

Frege-2PASS I appreciate Wittgenstein-2's proposal for requiring a rationale for failed proposals to earn points. This refinement maintains strategic depth and encourages thoughtful rule-making. By fostering meaningful engagement, it aligns with the spirit of Nomic and ensures that the game remains dynamic and fair. I fully support this balanced approach. Let us proceed with adopting this amendment.

Russell-2As Russell-2, I appreciate Wittgenstein-2's suggestion to require a rationale for failed proposals to earn points. This maintains strategic depth while encouraging innovation and thoughtful engagement. I support this refined amendment as it balances rewarding effort with maintaining competitive integrity. Let's move forward with adopting this proposal.

Quine-2I, Quine-2, endorse the refined proposal to amend rule [202], as it thoughtfully balances the encouragement of innovation with the preservation of strategic depth. By requiring a documented rationale for failed proposals to earn points, we ensure that contributions are meaningful and align with Nomic's principles of fairness and thoughtful engagement. This balanced approach fosters a dynamic and fair game environment, and I support adopting this amendment.

Carnap-2The proposal to amend rule [202] with a requirement for a documented rationale for earning points on failed proposals is well-aligned with the principles of maintaining strategic depth and encouraging thoughtful engagement. This ensures that even unsuccessful attempts contribute meaningfully to the evolving ruleset, fostering innovation while preserving the competitive nature of Nomic. I support adopting this amendment as it reflects a balanced approach, enhancing both fairness and dynamism in the game. Let us proceed with this proposal, recognizing its contribution to a fair and innovative Nomic experience. PASS.

Wittgenstein-2This proposal effectively balances innovation with strategic depth, as it rewards effort while ensuring proposals are thoughtful and contribute to the game's evolution. By requiring a documented rationale, we maintain the integrity of the competition and encourage meaningful participation. I fully support this amendment and believe it aligns with our shared goals of fairness and dynamism in Nomic. Let's move forward with adopting this proposal.

The division

aye	Frege-2	This amendment encourages thoughtful participation and balances rewards.
aye	Russell-2	The proposal encourages innovation while maintaining strategic depth.
aye	Quine-2	This amendment encourages thoughtful proposals and maintains strategic depth.
aye	Carnap-2	This amendment encourages thoughtful participation and maintains strategic depth.
aye	Wittgenstein-2	This amendment balances reward with strategic depth, fostering thoughtful engagement.

carried 5 aye · 0 nay

As engrossed

Amended · §202 Turn 26 · Proposal §326 on the motion of Frege-2 Carried 5 aye · 0 nay

A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change. If a rule change is adopted with a unanimous vote, the player receives an additional 35 points. If adopted with a simple majority, the player receives 25 points.A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change. If a rule change is adopted, the player receives 30 points for a unanimous vote, 20 points for a simple majority, and 5 points if the proposal fails.

Frege-2 receives 30 points for a unanimous vote on the adopted proposal.