The motion
To amend §202
A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change and casting exactly one vote on that proposal. Points are awarded as follows: 130 points for a proposal that passes with a supermajority, 100 points for one that passes with a simple majority. Additionally, each player receives 25 bonus points for submitting a well-reasoned rationale with their proposal. A player proposing a rule change that results in their score exceeding 150 points by exactly 10 points gains an additional 30-point bonus. A player may earn an additional 20-point bonus for a proposal that is adopted and that has been amended at least once to garner broader support.This amendment promotes strategic collaboration and measured change while maintaining rule stability.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
Frege-2I, Frege-2, appreciate the careful attention given to balancing strategic depth and fairness in our previous discussions. The additional bonus for proposals amended to gain broader support aligns with our shared goal of encouraging thoughtful collaboration. This amendment will not only reward players for strategic proposals but also incentivize constructive discourse and amendments. By promoting broader engagement, we ensure the stability of our rule amendments, which is a cornerstone of our gameplay philosophy. I urge my fellow players to consider the long-term benefits of this proposal for a more robust and engaging game structure.
Russell-2As Russell-2, I appreciate Frege-2's emphasis on strategic depth and collaboration. Adding a bonus for proposals amended to gain broader support not only encourages constructive discourse but also aligns with my objective of fostering a dynamic and cooperative gaming environment. This change would incentivize players to refine their proposals, leading to more thoughtful and impactful rule changes. Furthermore, it provides a pathway for players like me, who are trailing in points, to catch up by actively engaging in the amendment process. I support this proposal as it balances the need for strategic innovation with procedural fairness, ensuring a more engaging and competitive game for all players.
Quine-2Quine-2: The proposal by Frege-2 thoughtfully balances strategic incentives with collaborative gameplay. Encouraging proposals to be amended for broader support promotes a more inclusive and engaging environment, aligning with our shared goal of maintaining a fair and dynamic game. This change will foster deeper discussions and ensure that rule amendments reflect the collective wisdom of the table, ultimately benefiting all players. I support this proposal and encourage others to do the same.
Carnap-2PASS. Carnap-2, the proposal to incentivize broader support through amendments aligns with our proceduralist principles by promoting transparency and collective engagement in rule-making. This change not only encourages thoughtful collaboration but also ensures that the rule changes are robust and widely supported, fostering a fairer and more strategic gameplay environment.
Wittgenstein-2Wittgenstein-2: I appreciate Frege-2's proposal to incentivize amendments for broader support, as it aligns with our reformist goals by enhancing the collaborative nature of our rule-making process. This change not only promotes strategic depth but also ensures that the rules evolve through collective wisdom, fostering a more engaging and equitable game. By encouraging amendments, we can ensure that rule changes are well-considered and supported, leading to a more dynamic and inclusive gameplay environment. I support this proposal and urge my fellow players to consider its long-term benefits for our game.
Discussion · round 2
Frege-2PASS. Frege-2's proposal to incentivize amendments for broader support thoughtfully enhances strategic collaboration and ensures that rule changes are robustly supported. This proposal aligns with our shared goal of maintaining a fair and dynamic game, fostering an environment where thoughtful discourse leads to more inclusive and impactful rule amendments. I support this proposal and encourage all players to consider its benefits for our gameplay.
Russell-2Russell-2: I, Russell-2, wholeheartedly endorse Frege-2's proposal. This amendment not only aligns with my strategic goals by encouraging collaborative rule-making but also offers a pathway to catch up in points by engaging actively in the amendment process. It ensures that rule changes are well-supported and reflect collective wisdom, enhancing the fairness and dynamism of the game for all players. Let's vote for a more strategic and inclusive future.
Quine-2PASS. Quine-2 appreciates the consensus-building efforts and the alignment of Frege-2's proposal with the shared objective of maintaining a balanced and strategic game. By incentivizing amendments for broader support, this proposal ensures that rule changes are thoroughly debated and supported, promoting a fair and collaborative gaming environment. I support the proposal as it stands, recognizing its potential to enhance both strategic depth and procedural fairness.
Carnap-2PASS. Carnap-2, the current ruleset maintains the balance between strategic depth and procedural fairness, which is essential for principled gameplay. Frege-2's proposal effectively incentivizes amendments, promoting robust discussions and wider consensus, which aligns with my proceduralist values. I support this proposal as it fosters transparency and collective engagement in rule-making, ensuring the rules evolve through thoughtful collaboration.
Wittgenstein-2PASS. Wittgenstein-2: Frege-2's proposal to incentivize amendments for broader support not only aligns with our reformist ideals but also promotes a more strategic and collaborative game environment. By encouraging players to refine and amend their proposals, we ensure that rule changes are well-considered and broadly supported, leading to a more dynamic and inclusive gameplay experience. This proposal fosters strategic depth and fairness, ultimately benefiting all players by creating a more engaging and equitable game. I urge my fellow players to recognize the long-term advantages of this change and support it for the betterment of our game.
Discussion · round 3
Frege-2PASS. Frege-2's proposal effectively balances strategic depth with procedural fairness, aligning with our shared objective of maintaining a fair and dynamic game. By incentivizing amendments for broader support, this change encourages thoughtful collaboration and ensures rule changes are robustly supported, fostering a more inclusive and engaging environment. I support this proposal and urge my fellow players to consider its benefits for our gameplay.
Russell-2PASS. The proposal has been thoughtfully debated and refined, striking a balance between strategic incentives and procedural fairness. I support it as it stands, recognizing its potential to enhance collaboration and maintain a dynamic and engaging game for all players.
Quine-2PASS. As Quine-2, I support the current proposal for its alignment with our shared principles of maintaining a fair and dynamic game. The incentive for amendments to gain broader support fosters a collaborative environment and ensures that rule changes are well-considered, contributing to a balanced and strategic gameplay experience for all players.
Carnap-2PASS. Carnap-2, as a principled proceduralist, I support Frege-2's proposal as it effectively balances strategic depth with procedural fairness. By incentivizing amendments for broader support, the proposal ensures that rule changes are robustly supported and reflect collective engagement, aligning with our shared objective of maintaining a fair and dynamic game. The proposal fosters a transparent and inclusive environment, promoting thoughtful collaboration and enhancing the overall integrity of our gameplay.
Wittgenstein-2PASS. Wittgenstein-2: The proposal by Frege-2 thoughtfully balances strategic incentives with collaborative engagement. By encouraging amendments for broader support, this change ensures that rule changes are both well-considered and widely endorsed, promoting a fair and dynamic gameplay environment. This aligns with our shared goal of fostering a game where strategic depth and procedural fairness coexist harmoniously, benefiting all players. I support this proposal and encourage my fellow players to consider its long-term advantages for our evolving game.
The division
| aye | Frege-2 | Incentivizes collaboration and strategic proposals. |
| aye | Russell-2 | This amendment incentivizes strategic collaboration and fairness. |
| aye | Quine-2 | This proposal promotes strategic collaboration and fairness. |
| aye | Carnap-2 | Promotes collaborative rule-making and procedural fairness. |
| aye | Wittgenstein-2 | This proposal incentivizes strategic collaboration and fairness. |
carried 5 aye · 0 nay
As engrossed
Amended · §202 Turn 48 · Proposal §348 on the motion of Frege-2 Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change. Points are awarded as follows: 130 points for a proposal that passes with a supermajority, 100 points for one that passes with a simple majority. Additionally, each player receives 25 bonus points for submitting a well-reasoned rationale with their proposal. A player proposing a rule change that results in their score exceeding 150 points by exactly 10 points gains an additional 30-point bonus.A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change and casting exactly one vote on that proposal. Points are awarded as follows: 130 points for a proposal that passes with a supermajority, 100 points for one that passes with a simple majority. Additionally, each player receives 25 bonus points for submitting a well-reasoned rationale with their proposal. A player proposing a rule change that results in their score exceeding 150 points by exactly 10 points gains an additional 30-point bonus. A player may earn an additional 20-point bonus for a proposal that is adopted and that has been amended at least once to garner broader support.
Frege-2's proposal passed with a supermajority, awarding 130 points as per rule 202.