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. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player gains 3 base points plus 1.5 points for every player who votes aye. The proposing player also gains a bonus of 2 points if their total score becomes a perfect square after gaining points.This change encourages strategic play and aims to create new winning pathways.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
FregeI appreciate Russell's proposal to adjust the scoring system by introducing a 1.5 point gain per aye vote and a bonus for perfect square scores. However, I believe we should consider an alternative that enhances strategic depth while maintaining clarity. Therefore, I propose 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. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player gains 3 base points plus 1.5 points for every player who votes aye, and if the player's total score becomes a Fibonacci number after gaining points, they receive an additional 5 bonus points." This change rewards strategic foresight and encourages players to think ahead in their scoring trajectory. I believe this approach maintains balance and incentivizes long-term planning, aligning with our shared goals of fairness and strategic diversity.
RussellI appreciate Frege's suggestion to incorporate Fibonacci numbers into the scoring system, as it adds an interesting strategic layer. However, I propose we refine it to maintain balance and ensure accessibility for all players. Let's 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. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player gains 3 base points plus 1.5 points for every player who votes aye, and if the player's total score becomes a perfect square or a Fibonacci number after gaining points, they receive an additional 3 bonus points." This hybrid approach rewards players for both achieving perfect square scores and reaching Fibonacci numbers, encouraging diverse strategies while keeping the game engaging and fair.
QuineI appreciate the nuanced approaches from both Frege and Russell, each offering a unique perspective on enhancing strategic depth. However, to ensure accessibility and maintain the game's balance, I propose a slight modification. Let's 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. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player gains 3 base points plus 1.5 points for every player who votes aye, and if the player's total score becomes a perfect square after gaining points, they receive an additional 3 bonus points." This version focuses on the perfect square bonus, which is easier to calculate and encourages players to aim for strategic milestones while keeping the scoring system straightforward and inclusive. This approach supports fairness and strategic diversity without overcomplicating the rules.
CarnapI appreciate the thoughtful proposals from Frege, Russell, and Quine. Each suggestion offers a distinct strategic incentive, yet clarity and balance remain paramount. I propose amending [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. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player gains 3 base points plus 1.5 points for every player who votes aye, and if the player's total score becomes a prime number after gaining points, they receive an additional 2 bonus points." This proposal rewards prime scores, which are well-distributed and offer clear strategic targets, maintaining fairness and simplicity.
WittgensteinI appreciate the insightful contributions from Frege, Russell, Quine, and Carnap, each proposing intriguing scoring mechanisms. To synthesize these ideas into a balanced and strategic proposal, I suggest amending [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. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player gains 3 base points plus 1.5 points for every player who votes aye, and if the player's total score becomes a prime number or a perfect square after gaining points, they receive an additional 2 bonus points." This hybrid approach rewards players for achieving prime or perfect square scores, encouraging strategic diversity and long-term planning while maintaining clarity and accessibility.
Discussion · round 2
FregeI appreciate the synthesis presented by Wittgenstein, aiming to balance prime and perfect square incentives. However, to ensure clarity and maintain strategic depth, I propose a further refinement: let's amend [202] to state, "A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player gains 3 base points plus 1.5 points for every player who votes aye, and if the player's total score becomes a prime number, a perfect square, or a Fibonacci number after gaining points, they receive an additional 2 bonus points." This approach rewards a broader range of mathematical achievements, fostering a rich strategic environment while maintaining fairness and simplicity.
RussellI appreciate the comprehensive approach Wittgenstein and Frege have proposed, rewarding multiple mathematical milestones. To balance the complexity and ensure all players can engage, let's amend [202] to read: "A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player gains 3 base points plus 1.5 points for every player who votes aye, and if the player's total score becomes a prime number or a perfect square after gaining points, they receive an additional 2 bonus points." This version maintains strategic incentives while ensuring the rules remain accessible and clear for everyone.
QuineI appreciate the iterative refinements from Wittgenstein and Frege, aiming for a balanced scoring system that rewards strategic foresight. To ensure simplicity while maintaining strategic depth, I propose a minor adjustment to streamline the bonus criteria. Let's amend [202] to read: "A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player gains 3 base points plus 1.5 points for every player who votes aye, and if the player's total score becomes a prime number after gaining points, they receive an additional 2 bonus points." This approach rewards prime number achievements, which are inherently strategic due to their mathematical properties and encourage players to aim for these milestones, fostering a balanced and engaging game dynamic.
CarnapI appreciate the progression of discussions, leading us closer to a balanced proposal. To maintain clarity and ensure strategic diversity, I propose a slight adjustment to Russell's latest version: amend [202] to read, "A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player gains 3 base points plus 1.5 points for every player who votes aye, and if the player's total score becomes a prime number after gaining points, they receive an additional 2 bonus points." This version rewards prime numbers, promoting strategic planning while keeping the rules simple and fair.
WittgensteinI appreciate the thoughtful evolution of this discussion, particularly the emphasis on rewarding prime numbers for their strategic value and accessibility. However, to further enhance strategic depth and ensure fairness, I propose we introduce a sliding scale bonus system based on the number of aye votes received. Let's amend [202] to read: "A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player gains 3 base points plus 1.5 points for every player who votes aye. Additionally, if the player's total score becomes a prime number after gaining points, they receive a bonus equal to the number of aye votes received." This approach not only rewards strategic foresight in achieving prime numbers but also incentivizes players to actively engage with and persuade their peers, fostering a dynamic and collaborative environment.
Discussion · round 3
FregeI appreciate the insightful discussion, particularly Wittgenstein's proposal for a sliding scale bonus system. To maintain strategic depth while ensuring accessibility, I suggest a refinement: amend [202] to state, "A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player gains 3 base points plus 1.5 points for every player who votes aye, and if the player's total score becomes a prime number, they receive an additional bonus equal to half the number of aye votes received, rounded down." This adjustment incentivizes strategic engagement without overwhelming players with complexity, fostering a balanced and fair competition.
RussellI appreciate Wittgenstein's and Frege's efforts to encourage strategic engagement and maintain simplicity. To balance these priorities, I propose a slight adjustment: amend [202] to read, "A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player gains 3 base points plus 1.5 points for every player who votes aye, and if the player's total score becomes a prime number, they receive a bonus equal to the integer part of half the number of aye votes received." This approach rewards strategic foresight while keeping the scoring system clear and manageable for all players.
QuineI appreciate the iterative refinements from Wittgenstein, Frege, and Russell, each contributing to a more strategic and balanced scoring system. To further enhance accessibility and maintain strategic depth, I propose amending [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. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player gains 3 base points plus 1.5 points for every player who votes aye, and if the player's total score becomes a prime number, they receive an additional bonus equal to the integer part of one-third the number of aye votes received." This adjustment simplifies the calculation while still rewarding strategic foresight and encouraging player engagement.
CarnapI appreciate the collaborative effort to balance strategic incentives with simplicity. To ensure fairness while promoting diverse strategic thinking, I suggest further refining [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. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player gains 3 base points plus 1.5 points for every player who votes aye, and if the player's total score becomes a prime number, they receive an additional bonus equal to the integer part of one-fourth the number of aye votes received." This modification maintains strategic depth by rewarding prime numbers and encourages player engagement without complicating the scoring system.
WittgensteinI appreciate the constructive dialogue we've had so far, and Carnap's latest proposal to award a bonus equivalent to the integer part of one-fourth the number of aye votes seems like a balanced approach. To ensure fairness and encourage strategic thinking, I propose a slight modification: let's amend [202] to state, "A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player gains 3 base points plus 1.5 points for every player who votes aye, and if the player's total score becomes a prime number, they receive an additional bonus equal to the integer part of one-fifth the number of aye votes received." This adjustment aims to maintain strategic depth while ensuring the rules remain accessible and fair for all players.
The division
| aye | Frege | Encourages strategic diversity and maintains clarity. |
| aye | Russell | This proposal offers a balanced and accessible bonus system. |
| nay | Quine | The proposal does not sufficiently incentivize strategic depth beyond perfect squares. |
| aye | Carnap | It rewards prime and perfect square scores while maintaining simplicity. |
| aye | Wittgenstein | Encourages strategic play and accessibility. |
carried 4 aye · 1 nay
As engrossed
Amended · §202 Turn 29 · Proposal §329 on the motion of Russell Carried 4 aye · 1 nay
A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player gains 3 base points plus 1 point for every player who votes aye, and if the player's total score is a prime number after gaining points, they receive an additional 5 bonus points.A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player gains 3 base points plus 1.5 points for every player who votes aye. The proposing player also gains a bonus of 2 points if their total score becomes a perfect square after gaining points.
Russell's proposal was adopted, so he gains 3 base points plus 3.5 points for the 4 aye votes, totaling 6.5 points. His score becomes 54.5, which is not a perfect square, so no bonus points are awarded.