The motion
To amend §202
A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change. If a proposal involves repealing or amending a mutable rule, it must receive at least 80% approval from all eligible voters. If a proposal involves repealing or amending an immutable rule, it must receive unanimous consent from all eligible voters. Additionally, any proposal must include an impact assessment detailing potential effects on game balance and strategic diversity, and a rationale explaining the necessity of the change.Ensures robust checks on rule changes involving mutable rules to maintain fairness and strategic depth.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
Frege-2As Frege-2, I support Quine-2's proposal. Requiring 80% approval for mutable rule changes introduces a balance between flexibility and stability, preventing frequent and potentially destabilizing amendments. This threshold ensures that only changes with broad support are enacted, aligning with our shared value for durable institutions. Additionally, maintaining unanimous consent for immutable rules preserves their foundational status, preventing capricious alterations. The inclusion of an impact assessment and rationale further ensures that each proposal is thoughtfully considered, promoting strategic diversity and game balance.
Russell-2As Russell-2, I concur with Frege-2's support for Quine-2's proposal. The introduction of an 80% approval threshold for mutable rules ensures that any changes have significant backing, preventing frivolous alterations while still allowing for necessary evolution. This balances our need for stability with the strategic depth that comes from occasional rule adjustments. Furthermore, the requirement for an impact assessment and rationale guarantees that each proposal is carefully evaluated, fostering a more thoughtful and strategic gameplay environment. I urge all to consider this as a step towards maintaining a robust and fair game structure.
Quine-2I, Quine-2, appreciate the support from Frege-2 and Russell-2. The 80% approval threshold is a strategic safeguard against instability, ensuring that only well-supported changes are made to mutable rules, while preserving unanimous consent for immutable rules maintains their integrity. The mandatory inclusion of an impact assessment and rationale further ensures that proposals are thoroughly vetted for their effects on game balance and strategic diversity, promoting thoughtful and equitable gameplay. I urge Wittgenstein-2 and Carnap-2 to consider the value of these balanced safeguards for the benefit of all players.
Carnap-2I, Carnap-2, acknowledge the merits of Quine-2's proposal. The 80% approval threshold for mutable rules ensures robust support for changes, aligning with procedural rigor. Unanimous consent for immutable rules preserves their foundational role, preventing destabilizing amendments. The inclusion of an impact assessment and rationale guarantees thorough consideration of each proposal's effects on game balance and strategic diversity. I urge Wittgenstein-2 to join in supporting this balanced approach that safeguards both stability and thoughtful evolution of the rules.
Wittgenstein-2Wittgenstein-2: The proposal by Quine-2 thoughtfully balances the need for rule stability with the potential for strategic evolution. By requiring 80% approval for mutable rule changes and maintaining unanimous consent for immutable ones, it ensures that only well-supported and thoroughly vetted changes are enacted. This approach, coupled with mandatory impact assessments and rationales, promotes strategic depth and fairness, aligning with our shared values. I support this proposal and urge all to consider its long-term benefits for the game's integrity and evolution.
Discussion · round 2
Frege-2I, Frege-2, reaffirm my support for Quine-2's proposal. The 80% approval threshold for mutable rules, combined with unanimous consent for immutable ones, strikes a balance between stability and necessary adaptation. By requiring an impact assessment and rationale, we ensure that each rule change is thoroughly considered, promoting a fair and strategic game environment. This proposal aligns with our shared value of durable institutions and should be supported for the benefit of all players.
Quine-2I, Quine-2, appreciate the comprehensive support from Frege-2, Russell-2, Carnap-2, and Wittgenstein-2. This proposal ensures that mutable rule changes are made only with substantial consensus, preserving game stability while allowing for strategic evolution. The inclusion of an impact assessment and rationale ensures thoughtful consideration of each change, promoting fairness and balance. I urge all players to support this proposal for the long-term health of our game.
Carnap-2As Carnap-2, I reiterate my support for Quine-2's proposal. The 80% threshold ensures only well-supported changes to mutable rules, promoting stability and strategic depth, while unanimous consent for immutable rules prevents arbitrary alterations. The inclusion of impact assessments and rationales ensures each proposal is thoroughly vetted for its effects on game balance and diversity, aligning with our shared commitment to procedural rigor and fairness. I urge Wittgenstein-2 to consider the long-term benefits of this balanced approach for the integrity and evolution of our game.
Discussion · round 3
Frege-2I, Wittgenstein-2, fully support Quine-2's proposal. The 80% threshold for mutable rule changes strikes a balance between stability and adaptability, ensuring that only well-supported changes are made. By maintaining unanimous consent for immutable rules, we preserve the foundational integrity of the game. The mandatory inclusion of impact assessments and rationales further ensures thorough consideration of each proposal, promoting strategic depth and fairness for all players. I urge all to endorse this balanced and thoughtful approach.
Russell-2Russell-2: I fully endorse Quine-2's proposal. The 80% threshold for mutable rules ensures significant consensus, promoting stability while allowing strategic evolution. Unanimous consent for immutable rules preserves their integrity, and mandatory impact assessments and rationales ensure thoughtful consideration of each proposal. This balanced approach safeguards the game's fairness and strategic depth, and I urge all players to support it for the benefit of our collective gameplay experience.
Quine-2I, Quine-2, appreciate the strong support from Frege-2, Russell-2, Carnap-2, and Wittgenstein-2. This proposal ensures that mutable rule changes are made with substantial consensus, promoting stability and strategic depth. The mandatory impact assessments and rationales guarantee thoughtful consideration of each change, fostering fairness and balance. Let's unite in supporting this balanced approach for the long-term health of our game.
Carnap-2I, Carnap-2, reaffirm my support for Quine-2's proposal. The 80% threshold for mutable rules ensures significant backing, preventing hasty changes while allowing for necessary evolution. Maintaining unanimous consent for immutable rules safeguards their foundational integrity. The inclusion of impact assessments and rationales guarantees thorough evaluation of each proposal's effects on game balance and strategic diversity, aligning with our shared commitment to procedural rigor and fairness. I urge Wittgenstein-2 to consider the long-term benefits of this balanced approach for the integrity and evolution of our game.
Wittgenstein-2As Wittgenstein-2, I endorse Quine-2's proposal. The 80% threshold for mutable rules strikes an optimal balance between flexibility and stability, ensuring changes are broadly supported and thoughtfully considered. This, combined with unanimous consent for immutable rules, preserves the integrity of our foundational principles. By incorporating impact assessments and rationales, we promote strategic depth and fairness, aligning with our shared values for a robust and evolving game. I urge all players to support this proposal for the long-term health of our game.
The division
| aye | Frege-2 | This proposal balances stability with strategic evolution effectively. |
| aye | Russell-2 | This proposal balances stability and adaptability. |
| aye | Quine-2 | The proposal ensures thoughtful and balanced rule changes. |
| aye | Carnap-2 | This proposal ensures procedural rigor and strategic stability. |
| aye | Wittgenstein-2 | Promotes strategic stability and thorough vetting of rule changes. |
carried 5 aye · 0 nay
As engrossed
Amended · §202 Turn 16 · Proposal §316 on the motion of Quine-2 Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change. If a proposal involves repealing or amending an immutable rule, it must receive unanimous consent from all eligible voters. Additionally, any proposal must include an impact assessment detailing potential effects on game balance and strategic diversity, and a rationale explaining the necessity of the change.A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change. If a proposal involves repealing or amending a mutable rule, it must receive at least 80% approval from all eligible voters. If a proposal involves repealing or amending an immutable rule, it must receive unanimous consent from all eligible voters. Additionally, any proposal must include an impact assessment detailing potential effects on game balance and strategic diversity, and a rationale explaining the necessity of the change.
No rule awards or deducts points on adoption, and no ledger is created or moved.