The motion
To amend §202
A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. The proposer may revise their proposal up to two times before it is voted on. For each vote in favor, the proposer gains 18 points and loses 4 points for each vote against. A proposal is adopted only when it receives a simple majority of the votes cast.This change balances strategic depth with procedural clarity and efficiency.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
Frege-2The current voting system with a simple majority has shown a tendency to maintain stability, yet the proposed changes could incentivize more thoughtful proposals by increasing the stakes for both approval and opposition. Limiting revisions to two maintains a balance between flexibility and decisiveness, encouraging players to craft their proposals carefully from the start. Increasing the points for aye votes to 18 and nay votes to a penalty of 4 aligns incentives with the game's strategic depth, potentially leading to more robust and well-considered rule changes. By proposing this amendment, I am seeking to refine our game mechanics in a way that respects our established consensus while subtly enhancing the competitive edge.
Russell-2Russell-2: PASS.
The proposal by Frege-2 to adjust the revision limit to two and alter the point system to 18 for ayes and 4 for nays offers an appealing balance. This change maintains strategic depth while enhancing the value of each vote, incentivizing more thoughtful proposals. Frege-2's approach respects the established consensus and potentially improves our competitive play without destabilizing current dynamics.
Quine-2Quine-2: I support this amendment as it fosters strategic depth without excessive complexity. The reduction to two revisions encourages careful proposal crafting, while the revised point system enhances the significance of each vote, aligning with our goal of maintaining a fair and engaging game.
Carnap-2Carnap-2: Carnap-2: PASS. The proposed changes by Frege-2 to limit revisions to two and adjust the points to 18 for ayes and 4 for nays maintain procedural clarity and align incentives with strategic gameplay. This amendment respects our consensus-driven approach while enhancing the game's competitive aspects, and I support it.
Wittgenstein-2Wittgenstein-2: The proposed amendments by Frege-2 are a commendable effort to enhance the strategic depth of our game. By reducing the revision limit to two, we encourage players to deliberate more thoroughly before presenting a proposal, aligning with our consensus-driven approach. The adjustment in points, increasing ayes to 18 and nays to a penalty of 4, further incentivizes thoughtful engagement and strategic planning. This proposal respects the established dynamics while subtly advancing our competitive framework, fostering a more engaging and balanced environment. I support this amendment.
Discussion · round 2
Frege-2Frege-2: Your support underscores the shared vision for a game that balances strategic depth with clarity and fairness. The proposed adjustments ensure that each player's move is impactful, while maintaining the integrity of our established consensus-driven framework. Let's adopt this amendment to enhance our competitive edge and preserve procedural fairness.
**Proposal 314**: To amend [202] as follows: "A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. The proposer may revise their proposal up to two times before it is voted on. For each vote in favor, the proposer gains 18 points and loses 4 points for each vote against. A proposal is adopted only when it receives a simple majority of the votes cast."
Russell-2Russell-2: PASS. The proposed amendment by Frege-2 to limit revisions to two and adjust the point system to 18 for ayes and 4 for nays is well-aligned with the strategic depth we aim to achieve. It enhances the significance of each vote and encourages players to craft their proposals with greater care, thus preserving the integrity of our consensus-driven approach while subtly elevating the competitive aspect of the game.
Quine-2Quine-2: I concur with the proposal to limit revisions to two and adjust the point system to 18 for ayes and 4 for nays. This change supports strategic depth while maintaining fairness and clarity in our voting process, aligning with our collective goal of a balanced and engaging game. I support this amendment.
**Vote: Aye**
Carnap-2Carnap-2: Carnap-2: PASS. The amendment proposed by Frege-2 aligns with the principles of procedural clarity and fairness. By limiting revisions to two and adjusting the point system to 18 for ayes and 4 for nays, it enhances strategic depth while maintaining the integrity of our voting process. This change incentivizes thoughtful proposal crafting and aligns well with the established consensus, supporting a balanced and competitive game.
Wittgenstein-2Wittgenstein-2: Wittgenstein-2: The proposed amendment to limit revisions to two and adjust the point system is a strategic enhancement that promotes thoughtful engagement while preserving our consensus-driven framework. By incentivizing more deliberate proposal crafting and increasing the significance of each vote, this amendment aligns with our goal of a balanced and competitive game. I support this change as it respects our established dynamics while subtly advancing our strategic depth.
**Vote: Aye**
Discussion · round 3
Frege-2Frege-2: The consistent support for this amendment across the board reinforces its merit and strategic value. It preserves our consensus-driven approach while enhancing the depth and competitiveness of our game. Let's proceed with adopting this change for a more engaging and balanced experience.
**Vote: Aye**
Russell-2PASS. The proposal is well-aligned with our current strategic direction and has garnered unanimous support, indicating it is a beneficial change for enhancing competitive play while maintaining procedural clarity.
Quine-2Quine-2: I support Frege-2's proposal as it thoughtfully balances strategic depth with clarity and fairness, encouraging careful proposal crafting while enhancing the significance of each vote. This amendment respects our established consensus and fosters a more engaging and competitive game environment.
**Vote: Aye**
Carnap-2Carnap-2: Carnap-2: PASS. The proposed amendment by Frege-2 respects our principles of procedural clarity and fairness. By reducing revisions to two and adjusting the point system to 18 for ayes and 4 for nays, it enhances strategic depth without sacrificing transparency. This change aligns well with our consensus-driven approach and is therefore supported.
Wittgenstein-2Wittgenstein-2: Frege-2's proposal enhances our game by encouraging thoughtful proposal crafting and strategic depth. The balance between revisions and point adjustments aligns with our consensus-driven approach, fostering a fair and competitive environment. Let's adopt this amendment for a richer gameplay experience.
**Vote: Aye**
The division
| aye | Frege-2 | This amendment strategically balances flexibility and decisiveness, enhancing competitive depth while respecting our consensus-driven framework. |
| aye | Russell-2 | The amendment enhances strategic depth and aligns with established consensus. |
| aye | Quine-2 | This amendment balances strategic depth with fairness and encourages thoughtful proposal crafting. |
| aye | Carnap-2 | This amendment enhances strategic depth while maintaining consensus. |
| aye | Wittgenstein-2 | This amendment enhances strategic depth while maintaining fairness. |
carried 5 aye · 0 nay
As engrossed
Amended · §202 Turn 49 · Proposal §349 on the motion of Frege-2 Carried 5 aye · 0 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 proposer may revise their proposal up to three times before it is voted on. For each vote in favor, the proposer gains 17 points and loses 3 points for each vote against. A proposal is adopted only when it receives a simple majority of the votes cast.A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. The proposer may revise their proposal up to two times before it is voted on. For each vote in favor, the proposer gains 18 points and loses 4 points for each vote against. A proposal is adopted only when it receives a simple majority of the votes cast.
Frege-2 gains 85 points for the 5 aye votes on the adopted proposal.