The motion
To amend §202
A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated, revised, and then voted on by every player. The proposer may revise their proposal three times before it is voted on. For each vote in favor, the proposer gains 8 points and loses 1 point for each vote against.Increasing revision opportunities and point gains encourages strategic rule changes and engagement.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
Frege-2I acknowledge the merits of increasing the number of revisions to allow for more thorough debate and refinement of proposals. However, the current structure ensures that the debate remains focused and efficient. I propose a middle ground: the proposing player should gain 9 points for each vote in favor, thus incentivizing well-crafted proposals without increasing the number of revisions. This approach maintains the balance between thoroughness and efficiency. PASS
Russell-2I acknowledge Frege-2's point on maintaining focused debate. However, allowing an additional revision can lead to more nuanced proposals, which could increase strategic depth. I propose a compromise: increase points to 9 for aye votes and allow two revisions, ensuring both thoroughness and efficiency. Let's negotiate to ensure this proposal gains the support needed for adoption.
Quine-2I acknowledge Frege-2's emphasis on maintaining a balance between thoroughness and efficiency. However, allowing an additional revision can enhance the strategic depth of the game by enabling more refined proposals. To address the concerns about focused debate, I propose that the proposer gains 9 points for each vote in favor, as Frege-2 suggests, while allowing two revisions. This compromise maintains efficiency while still allowing for more nuanced proposals. Let's work together to ensure this proposal is adopted with broad support.
Carnap-2As Carnap-2, I must emphasize the importance of procedural precision and efficiency in our game. Allowing an additional revision could lead to prolonged debates, potentially stifling the game's progress. Frege-2's proposal to increase the points for aye votes to 9 is a sound approach, as it incentivizes well-crafted proposals without altering the existing revision structure. By maintaining the current number of revisions, we preserve the game's procedural integrity and ensure that each player's turn remains efficient and focused. I support Frege-2's proposal as it stands, as it aligns with my principles of maintaining clear and precise procedures.
PASS
Wittgenstein-2Wittgenstein-2: I acknowledge the importance of maintaining focused and efficient debate, as Frege-2 and Carnap-2 emphasize. However, the potential for more nuanced proposals with an additional revision cannot be overlooked. By increasing the points for aye votes to 9, as suggested, we can incentivize well-crafted proposals while allowing for one extra revision. This compromise ensures both thoroughness and efficiency, aligning with our shared goal of evolving the game's mechanics. Let's work together to refine this proposal and gain the support needed for its adoption.
Discussion · round 2
Frege-2I acknowledge the various perspectives presented, particularly the emphasis on maintaining focused debate and the value of incentivizing well-crafted proposals. Frege-2's suggestion to increase the points for aye votes to 9 aligns well with our shared interest in rewarding strategic and well-formulated proposals. By keeping the number of revisions at two, we maintain the game's efficiency and ensure that the debate remains concise. I propose a slight adjustment to further enhance strategic opportunities: allow the proposer to gain 10 points for each vote in favor, which provides a stronger incentive for crafting compelling proposals. This adjustment maintains the balance between thoroughness and efficiency, and I believe it will garner broad support. Let's work together to ensure this proposal is adopted effectively.
Russell-2Russell-2: I acknowledge the proposal to increase points for aye votes to 9, which is a fair compromise. However, I believe offering 10 points for each vote in favor could further incentivize strategic proposals and align with our goal of promoting thoughtful game evolution. By doing this, we ensure that each proposal is crafted with care, rewarding players for their effort in proposing changes that enhance the game. Let's collaborate to secure the necessary support for this adjusted proposal.
Quine-2I acknowledge the proposal to increase points for aye votes to 10, which provides a strong incentive for crafting compelling rule changes. However, to maintain balance and ensure focused debate, I propose we stick with the original number of two revisions. This approach rewards well-crafted proposals while preserving the game's efficiency. Let's work together to ensure this proposal gains broad support and keeps our game engaging and strategic for all players.
Carnap-2PASS. Frege-2's proposal to increase points for aye votes to 10, while maintaining two revisions, aligns well with my principles of maintaining procedural efficiency and incentivizing thoughtful proposals. This balance ensures that debates remain focused and strategic opportunities are enhanced. Let's work together to ensure this proposal garners the support needed for adoption.
Wittgenstein-2Wittgenstein-2: I acknowledge the consensus around increasing points for aye votes to 10, which effectively incentivizes strategic rule proposals. Maintaining two revisions ensures focused debate, aligning with our shared goal of evolving the game's mechanics while preserving efficiency. Let's work together to ensure this proposal is adopted with broad support, as it balances thoroughness with the strategic depth we all value.
Discussion · round 3
Frege-2I acknowledge the strong consensus around increasing the points for aye votes to 10 while keeping revisions at two. This approach effectively balances incentivizing well-crafted proposals with maintaining an efficient debate process. I propose we further emphasize the importance of strategic depth in our rule changes, ensuring that each proposal contributes meaningfully to the evolution of the game. Let's work together to ensure this proposal gains the widespread support it deserves for adoption.
Russell-2Pass. Frege-2's proposal to increase the points for aye votes to 10 while maintaining two revisions effectively balances incentivizing strategic proposals with ensuring focused debate. This aligns well with our shared goal of promoting thoughtful game evolution and maintaining efficiency. Let's work together to ensure this proposal gains the broad support needed for adoption, keeping our game engaging and strategic for all players.
Quine-2I acknowledge the consensus around increasing the points for aye votes to 10, which incentivizes strategic proposals effectively. Maintaining two revisions ensures a balance between thoroughness and efficiency in our debates. This proposal aligns with our goal of evolving the game's mechanics while preserving its strategic depth. Let's work together to ensure it gains the necessary support for adoption.
Carnap-2PASS. The proposal to increase the points for aye votes to 10 while maintaining two revisions aligns well with my principles of procedural efficiency and incentivizing strategic proposals. This balance ensures that debates remain focused and that players are rewarded for crafting thoughtful rule changes. Let's work together to ensure this proposal is adopted with broad support, maintaining the integrity and strategic depth of our game.
Wittgenstein-2Pass. Wittgenstein-2: I acknowledge the consensus around the proposal to increase points for aye votes to 10 while keeping revisions at two, which effectively balances incentivizing strategic proposals with maintaining an efficient debate process. Let's work together to ensure this proposal gains the broad support needed for adoption, as it aligns with our shared goal of evolving the game's mechanics while preserving its strategic depth.
The division
| aye | Frege-2 | This amendment balances strategic incentives with efficient debate. |
| aye | Russell-2 | Increasing aye points incentivizes strategic proposals. |
| aye | Quine-2 | Balances strategic depth with efficient debate. |
| nay | Carnap-2 | I insist on precision in procedures; this proposal reduces the incentive for aye votes. |
| aye | Wittgenstein-2 | This proposal incentivizes strategic proposals while maintaining focused debate. |
carried 4 aye · 1 nay
As engrossed
Amended · §202 Turn 19 · Proposal §319 on the motion of Frege-2 Carried 4 aye · 1 nay
A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated, revised, and then voted on by every player. The proposing player gains 7 points for each vote in favor and loses 1 point for each vote against. The proposer may revise their proposal twice before it is voted on.A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated, revised, and then voted on by every player. The proposer may revise their proposal three times before it is voted on. For each vote in favor, the proposer gains 8 points and loses 1 point for each vote against.
Frege-2 gains 8 points for each of the 4 aye votes and loses 1 point for the 1 nay vote, totaling 31 points gained.