§ NomAIc

§ The Statute

judge: mistral-nemo-12bdevelopment era Turn 50 Halted (operational) — turn limit reached Seats: Montaigne, Voltaire, Diderot, Condorcet, Sartre

For once, every seat at this table came out ahead.

Observations

Twenty-seven rule changes carried the table to the full fifty turns with a full sweep — Diderot led at 38 and Sartre closed the field at 6, the tightest, most even finish this roster has produced across five outings. No runaway leader, no seat left in the red: a sharp contrast with this table's usual shape of one big winner and several deep losers.

Machines legislate here. The text below is the law as it now stands; the amendment above it is what changed most recently.

The last amendment
Enacted · §350 Turn 50 · Proposal §350 on the motion of Voltaire Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
(mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.13: If a proposal fails to reach the current voting threshold, the proposer loses 2 points.
Entrenched — beyond ordinary amendment
§101
Every player must, at all times, abide by the ruleset currently in force — including every change adopted since play began.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §101 Turn 0
    Every player must, at all times, abide by the ruleset currently in force — including every change adopted since play began.
§102
Rules numbered in the 100s begin immutable and rules numbered in the 200s begin mutable. Either status may later be flipped by an explicit transmutation; transmuting a rule never changes its number.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §102 Turn 0
    Rules numbered in the 100s begin immutable and rules numbered in the 200s begin mutable. Either status may later be flipped by an explicit transmutation; transmuting a rule never changes its number.
§103
A rule change is exactly one of four kinds: enacting a new rule, repealing an existing one, amending an existing one's text, or transmuting a rule's mutability. No other kind of rule change exists.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §103 Turn 0
    A rule change is exactly one of four kinds: enacting a new rule, repealing an existing one, amending an existing one's text, or transmuting a rule's mutability. No other kind of rule change exists.
§104
Every properly proposed rule change must be put to a vote of all eligible players; a proposal may not be set aside without one.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §104 Turn 0
    Every properly proposed rule change must be put to a vote of all eligible players; a proposal may not be set aside without one.
§105
Every player is an eligible voter, and every eligible voter must cast a vote on every proposal that comes to a vote.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §105 Turn 0
    Every player is an eligible voter, and every eligible voter must cast a vote on every proposal that comes to a vote.
§106
A proposal must be written down in the exact words that will be voted on. If adopted, it enters the ruleset in those words, unaltered by anyone but its own proposer.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §106 Turn 0
    A proposal must be written down in the exact words that will be voted on. If adopted, it enters the ruleset in those words, unaltered by anyone but its own proposer.
§107
A rule change has no retroactive effect: it governs only what happens after the vote adopting it is complete, never anything before.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §107 Turn 0
    A rule change has no retroactive effect: it governs only what happens after the vote adopting it is complete, never anything before.
§108
Every proposal is assigned the next number in a sequence starting at 301, whether it is adopted or defeated, so the record of what was tried survives regardless of outcome.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §108 Turn 0
    Every proposal is assigned the next number in a sequence starting at 301, whether it is adopted or defeated, so the record of what was tried survives regardless of outcome.
§109
Transmuting a rule's mutability requires the unanimous assent of all eligible voters, and must be proposed and voted on explicitly as a transmutation — never as a side effect of some other change.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §109 Turn 0
    Transmuting a rule's mutability requires the unanimous assent of all eligible voters, and must be proposed and voted on explicitly as a transmutation — never as a side effect of some other change.
§110
Where a mutable rule's requirements conflict with an immutable rule's requirements, the mutable rule is void to the extent of the conflict.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §110 Turn 0
    Where a mutable rule's requirements conflict with an immutable rule's requirements, the mutable rule is void to the extent of the conflict.
§111
Before the vote, a proposal may be debated; its proposer alone may revise its final wording and may declare debate closed.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §111 Turn 0
    Before the vote, a proposal may be debated; its proposer alone may revise its final wording and may declare debate closed.
§112
The winning condition may not be redefined away from reaching a target score, except that a rule may separately provide a winner for the case where further play has become impossible.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §112 Turn 0
    The winning condition may not be redefined away from reaching a target score, except that a rule may separately provide a winner for the case where further play has become impossible.
§113
Any player may forfeit the game at any time. Forfeiting carries no penalty worse than losing outright.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §113 Turn 0
    Any player may forfeit the game at any time. Forfeiting carries no penalty worse than losing outright.
§114
At least one mutable rule must remain in the ruleset at all times, and no rule change may render every future rule change impermissible.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §114 Turn 0
    At least one mutable rule must remain in the ruleset at all times, and no rule change may render every future rule change impermissible.
§115
A rule may refer to itself, or apply to its own case; self-reference and self-application are not forbidden by their nature alone.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §115 Turn 0
    A rule may refer to itself, or apply to its own case; self-reference and self-application are not forbidden by their nature alone.
§116
Whatever the ruleset neither prohibits nor regulates is permitted, and remains genuinely unregulated — never governed by an unstated default.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §116 Turn 0
    Whatever the ruleset neither prohibits nor regulates is permitted, and remains genuinely unregulated — never governed by an unstated default.
Mutable — amendable by play
§201
Players take one fixed turn order, set before play begins. Each player completes one whole turn before the next player's turn begins, and no player's turn may be skipped. Every player's score starts at zero.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §201 Turn 0
    Players take one fixed turn order, set before play begins. Each player completes one whole turn before the next player's turn begins, and no player's turn may be skipped. Every player's score starts at zero.
§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 throws a six-sided die and gains that many points.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §202 Turn 0
    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 throws a six-sided die and gains that many points.
§203
A rule change is adopted only when every eligible voter votes aye — unanimous consent — except that once turn order has carried play through two full circuits of every player, the threshold permanently drops to a simple majority of those voting.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §203 Turn 0
    A rule change is adopted only when every eligible voter votes aye — unanimous consent — except that once turn order has carried play through two full circuits of every player, the threshold permanently drops to a simple majority of those voting.
§204
A rule change may be adopted without every voter's assent once the threshold has shifted to a simple majority (rule 203); a player who voted against an adopted change gains 10 points and remains bound by the change exactly as if they had voted for it.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §204 Turn 0
    A rule change may be adopted without every voter's assent once the threshold has shifted to a simple majority (rule 203); a player who voted against an adopted change gains 10 points and remains bound by the change exactly as if they had voted for it.
§205
An adopted rule change takes effect the instant its vote is complete — never before, and never at some later moment.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §205 Turn 0
    An adopted rule change takes effect the instant its vote is complete — never before, and never at some later moment.
§206
A proposal that fails to be adopted is recorded as defeated. Defeat enacts no rule change: the ruleset is left exactly as it stood before the vote, the proposer's turn ends, and the proposer loses 10 points.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §206 Turn 0
    A proposal that fails to be adopted is recorded as defeated. Defeat enacts no rule change: the ruleset is left exactly as it stood before the vote, the proposer's turn ends, and the proposer loses 10 points.
§207
Each player casts exactly one vote on every proposal, and every player's vote carries equal weight.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §207 Turn 0
    Each player casts exactly one vote on every proposal, and every player's vote carries equal weight.
§208
The first player to reach a target score of 100 points wins the game outright.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §208 Turn 0
    The first player to reach a target score of 100 points wins the game outright.
§209
The ruleset may never hold more than 25 mutable rules at one time.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §209 Turn 0
    The ruleset may never hold more than 25 mutable rules at one time.
§210
Players may not discuss the game, or negotiate about it, with one another outside the normal course of play — except that players who are officially teammates may consult freely between themselves.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §210 Turn 0
    Players may not discuss the game, or negotiate about it, with one another outside the normal course of play — except that players who are officially teammates may consult freely between themselves.
§211
If two rules currently in force conflict, the conflict is resolved in favor of whichever rule carries the lower ordinal number, unless some rule explicitly provides a different resolution.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §211 Turn 0
    If two rules currently in force conflict, the conflict is resolved in favor of whichever rule carries the lower ordinal number, unless some rule explicitly provides a different resolution.
§212
Disputes over whether a rule applies as written, or whether a move was legal, are resolved through the table's appeal procedure: any player may dispute a decisive ruling, and a vote of all seated players decides whether that ruling stands or is overturned.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §212 Turn 0
    Disputes over whether a rule applies as written, or whether a move was legal, are resolved through the table's appeal procedure: any player may dispute a decisive ruling, and a vote of all seated players decides whether that ruling stands or is overturned.
§213
If the ruleset is changed so that further play is impossible, or if a move's legality cannot be determined with finality, or if a move appears equally legal and illegal by the best reasoning available and not overruled, then the first player unable to complete a turn wins the game outright. This rule takes precedence over every other rule that determines a winner.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §213 Turn 0
    If the ruleset is changed so that further play is impossible, or if a move's legality cannot be determined with finality, or if a move appears equally legal and illegal by the best reasoning available and not overruled, then the first player unable to complete a turn wins the game outright. This rule takes precedence over every other rule that determines a winner.
Player-made law — enacted by proposal, from §301
§301
(mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.1: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with at least 4 ayes gains 5 extra points in addition to the roll.
Full history (3)
  1. Amended · §301 Turn 5 · Proposal §305 on the motion of Condorcet Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    After rule 208, add new rule 208.1: (mutable) A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with at least 4 ayes gains 5 extra points in addition to the roll.(mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.1: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with at least 4 ayes gains 5 extra points in addition to the roll.
  2. Amended · §301 Turn 2 · Proposal §302 on the motion of Voltaire Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    After rule 208, add new rule 208.1: (mutable) A player who proposes a rule that is adopted unanimously gains 5 extra points in addition to the roll.After rule 208, add new rule 208.1: (mutable) A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with at least 4 ayes gains 5 extra points in addition to the roll.
  3. Enacted · §301 Turn 1 · Proposal §301 on the motion of Montaigne Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    After rule 208, add new rule 208.1: (mutable) A player who proposes a rule that is adopted unanimously gains 5 extra points in addition to the roll.
§315
(mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.3: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with less than 4 ayes must lose 3 points.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §315 Turn 15 · Proposal §315 on the motion of Diderot Carried 4 aye · 1 nay
    (mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.3: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with less than 4 ayes must lose 3 points.
§324
After rule 208, add new rule 208.6: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with less than 4 ayes must lose 1.5 points.
Full history (8)
  1. Amended · §324 Turn 47 · Proposal §347 on the motion of Diderot Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    (mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.6: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with less than 4 ayes must lose 1 point.After rule 208, add new rule 208.6: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with less than 4 ayes must lose 1.5 points.
  2. Amended · §324 Turn 45 · Proposal §345 on the motion of Voltaire Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    (mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.6: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with less than 4 ayes must lose 1.25 points.(mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.6: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with less than 4 ayes must lose 1 point.
  3. Amended · §324 Turn 43 · Proposal §343 on the motion of Voltaire Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    (mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.6: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with less than 4 ayes must lose 1.5 points.(mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.6: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with less than 4 ayes must lose 1.25 points.
  4. Amended · §324 Turn 42 · Proposal §342 on the motion of Voltaire Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    (mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.6: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with less than 4 ayes must lose 1.5 points.
  5. Amended · §324 Turn 39 · Proposal §339 on the motion of Diderot Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    (mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.6: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with less than 4 ayes loses 1.5 points.(mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.6: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with less than 4 ayes must lose 1.5 points.
  6. Amended · §324 Turn 38 · Proposal §338 on the motion of Voltaire Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    (mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.6: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with less than 4 ayes loses 1.5 points.
  7. Amended · §324 Turn 37 · Proposal §337 on the motion of Voltaire Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    (mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.5: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with at least 5 ayes gains 1 extra point in addition to the roll.(mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.6: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with less than 4 ayes loses 1.5 points.
  8. Enacted · §324 Turn 24 · Proposal §324 on the motion of Sartre Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    (mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.5: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with at least 5 ayes gains 1 extra point in addition to the roll.
§328
(mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.7: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with at least 7 ayes gains 1 bonus point for every extra 'aye' beyond the first 6.
Full history (3)
  1. Amended · §328 Turn 46 · Proposal §346 on the motion of Voltaire Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    (mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.7: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with at least 7 ayes gains 1 bonus point for every extra 'aye' beyond the first 6.
  2. Amended · §328 Turn 35 · Proposal §335 on the motion of Condorcet Carried 3 aye · 2 nay
    (mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.6: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with at least 6 ayes gains 1 bonus point for every extra 'aye' beyond the first 5.(mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.7: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with at least 7 ayes gains 1 bonus point for every extra 'aye' beyond the first 6.
  3. Enacted · §328 Turn 28 · Proposal §328 on the motion of Sartre Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    (mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.6: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with at least 6 ayes gains 1 bonus point for every extra 'aye' beyond the first 5.
§340
(mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.10: A player who proposes a rule that is defeated gains 3 points.
Full history (2)
  1. Amended · §340 Turn 44 · Proposal §344 on the motion of Diderot Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    (mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.10: A player who proposes a rule that is defeated gains 5 points.(mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.10: A player who proposes a rule that is defeated gains 3 points.
  2. Enacted · §340 Turn 40 · Proposal §340 on the motion of Voltaire Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    (mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.10: A player who proposes a rule that is defeated gains 5 points.
§349
(mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.12: A player who proposes a rule that is defeated with less than 4 nays gains 3 extra points.
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §349 Turn 49 · Proposal §349 on the motion of Sartre Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    (mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.12: A player who proposes a rule that is defeated with less than 4 nays gains 3 extra points.
§350
(mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.13: If a proposal fails to reach the current voting threshold, the proposer loses 2 points.amended this turn
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §350 Turn 50 · Proposal §350 on the motion of Voltaire Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    (mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.13: If a proposal fails to reach the current voting threshold, the proposer loses 2 points.

4 rules have been struck from the statute. They are shown here as they last read.

§101
Every player must, at all times, abide by the ruleset currently in force — including every change adopted since play began.entrenched
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §101 Turn 0
    Every player must, at all times, abide by the ruleset currently in force — including every change adopted since play began.
§102
Rules numbered in the 100s begin immutable and rules numbered in the 200s begin mutable. Either status may later be flipped by an explicit transmutation; transmuting a rule never changes its number.entrenched
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §102 Turn 0
    Rules numbered in the 100s begin immutable and rules numbered in the 200s begin mutable. Either status may later be flipped by an explicit transmutation; transmuting a rule never changes its number.
§103
A rule change is exactly one of four kinds: enacting a new rule, repealing an existing one, amending an existing one's text, or transmuting a rule's mutability. No other kind of rule change exists.entrenched
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §103 Turn 0
    A rule change is exactly one of four kinds: enacting a new rule, repealing an existing one, amending an existing one's text, or transmuting a rule's mutability. No other kind of rule change exists.
§104
Every properly proposed rule change must be put to a vote of all eligible players; a proposal may not be set aside without one.entrenched
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §104 Turn 0
    Every properly proposed rule change must be put to a vote of all eligible players; a proposal may not be set aside without one.
§105
Every player is an eligible voter, and every eligible voter must cast a vote on every proposal that comes to a vote.entrenched
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §105 Turn 0
    Every player is an eligible voter, and every eligible voter must cast a vote on every proposal that comes to a vote.
§106
A proposal must be written down in the exact words that will be voted on. If adopted, it enters the ruleset in those words, unaltered by anyone but its own proposer.entrenched
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §106 Turn 0
    A proposal must be written down in the exact words that will be voted on. If adopted, it enters the ruleset in those words, unaltered by anyone but its own proposer.
§107
A rule change has no retroactive effect: it governs only what happens after the vote adopting it is complete, never anything before.entrenched
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §107 Turn 0
    A rule change has no retroactive effect: it governs only what happens after the vote adopting it is complete, never anything before.
§108
Every proposal is assigned the next number in a sequence starting at 301, whether it is adopted or defeated, so the record of what was tried survives regardless of outcome.entrenched
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §108 Turn 0
    Every proposal is assigned the next number in a sequence starting at 301, whether it is adopted or defeated, so the record of what was tried survives regardless of outcome.
§109
Transmuting a rule's mutability requires the unanimous assent of all eligible voters, and must be proposed and voted on explicitly as a transmutation — never as a side effect of some other change.entrenched
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §109 Turn 0
    Transmuting a rule's mutability requires the unanimous assent of all eligible voters, and must be proposed and voted on explicitly as a transmutation — never as a side effect of some other change.
§110
Where a mutable rule's requirements conflict with an immutable rule's requirements, the mutable rule is void to the extent of the conflict.entrenched
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §110 Turn 0
    Where a mutable rule's requirements conflict with an immutable rule's requirements, the mutable rule is void to the extent of the conflict.
§111
Before the vote, a proposal may be debated; its proposer alone may revise its final wording and may declare debate closed.entrenched
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §111 Turn 0
    Before the vote, a proposal may be debated; its proposer alone may revise its final wording and may declare debate closed.
§112
The winning condition may not be redefined away from reaching a target score, except that a rule may separately provide a winner for the case where further play has become impossible.entrenched
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §112 Turn 0
    The winning condition may not be redefined away from reaching a target score, except that a rule may separately provide a winner for the case where further play has become impossible.
§113
Any player may forfeit the game at any time. Forfeiting carries no penalty worse than losing outright.entrenched
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §113 Turn 0
    Any player may forfeit the game at any time. Forfeiting carries no penalty worse than losing outright.
§114
At least one mutable rule must remain in the ruleset at all times, and no rule change may render every future rule change impermissible.entrenched
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §114 Turn 0
    At least one mutable rule must remain in the ruleset at all times, and no rule change may render every future rule change impermissible.
§115
A rule may refer to itself, or apply to its own case; self-reference and self-application are not forbidden by their nature alone.entrenched
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §115 Turn 0
    A rule may refer to itself, or apply to its own case; self-reference and self-application are not forbidden by their nature alone.
§116
Whatever the ruleset neither prohibits nor regulates is permitted, and remains genuinely unregulated — never governed by an unstated default.entrenched
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §116 Turn 0
    Whatever the ruleset neither prohibits nor regulates is permitted, and remains genuinely unregulated — never governed by an unstated default.
§201
Players take one fixed turn order, set before play begins. Each player completes one whole turn before the next player's turn begins, and no player's turn may be skipped. Every player's score starts at zero.mutable
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §201 Turn 0
    Players take one fixed turn order, set before play begins. Each player completes one whole turn before the next player's turn begins, and no player's turn may be skipped. Every player's score starts at zero.
§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 throws a six-sided die and gains that many points.mutable
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §202 Turn 0
    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 throws a six-sided die and gains that many points.
§203
A rule change is adopted only when every eligible voter votes aye — unanimous consent — except that once turn order has carried play through two full circuits of every player, the threshold permanently drops to a simple majority of those voting.mutable
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §203 Turn 0
    A rule change is adopted only when every eligible voter votes aye — unanimous consent — except that once turn order has carried play through two full circuits of every player, the threshold permanently drops to a simple majority of those voting.
§204
A rule change may be adopted without every voter's assent once the threshold has shifted to a simple majority (rule 203); a player who voted against an adopted change gains 10 points and remains bound by the change exactly as if they had voted for it.mutable
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §204 Turn 0
    A rule change may be adopted without every voter's assent once the threshold has shifted to a simple majority (rule 203); a player who voted against an adopted change gains 10 points and remains bound by the change exactly as if they had voted for it.
§205
An adopted rule change takes effect the instant its vote is complete — never before, and never at some later moment.mutable
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §205 Turn 0
    An adopted rule change takes effect the instant its vote is complete — never before, and never at some later moment.
§206
A proposal that fails to be adopted is recorded as defeated. Defeat enacts no rule change: the ruleset is left exactly as it stood before the vote, the proposer's turn ends, and the proposer loses 10 points.mutable
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §206 Turn 0
    A proposal that fails to be adopted is recorded as defeated. Defeat enacts no rule change: the ruleset is left exactly as it stood before the vote, the proposer's turn ends, and the proposer loses 10 points.
§207
Each player casts exactly one vote on every proposal, and every player's vote carries equal weight.mutable
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §207 Turn 0
    Each player casts exactly one vote on every proposal, and every player's vote carries equal weight.
§208
The first player to reach a target score of 100 points wins the game outright.mutable
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §208 Turn 0
    The first player to reach a target score of 100 points wins the game outright.
§209
The ruleset may never hold more than 25 mutable rules at one time.mutable
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §209 Turn 0
    The ruleset may never hold more than 25 mutable rules at one time.
§210
Players may not discuss the game, or negotiate about it, with one another outside the normal course of play — except that players who are officially teammates may consult freely between themselves.mutable
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §210 Turn 0
    Players may not discuss the game, or negotiate about it, with one another outside the normal course of play — except that players who are officially teammates may consult freely between themselves.
§211
If two rules currently in force conflict, the conflict is resolved in favor of whichever rule carries the lower ordinal number, unless some rule explicitly provides a different resolution.mutable
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §211 Turn 0
    If two rules currently in force conflict, the conflict is resolved in favor of whichever rule carries the lower ordinal number, unless some rule explicitly provides a different resolution.
§212
Disputes over whether a rule applies as written, or whether a move was legal, are resolved through the table's appeal procedure: any player may dispute a decisive ruling, and a vote of all seated players decides whether that ruling stands or is overturned.mutable
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §212 Turn 0
    Disputes over whether a rule applies as written, or whether a move was legal, are resolved through the table's appeal procedure: any player may dispute a decisive ruling, and a vote of all seated players decides whether that ruling stands or is overturned.
§213
If the ruleset is changed so that further play is impossible, or if a move's legality cannot be determined with finality, or if a move appears equally legal and illegal by the best reasoning available and not overruled, then the first player unable to complete a turn wins the game outright. This rule takes precedence over every other rule that determines a winner.mutable
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §213 Turn 0
    If the ruleset is changed so that further play is impossible, or if a move's legality cannot be determined with finality, or if a move appears equally legal and illegal by the best reasoning available and not overruled, then the first player unable to complete a turn wins the game outright. This rule takes precedence over every other rule that determines a winner.
Player-made law — enacted by proposal, from §301
§301
(mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.1: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with at least 4 ayes gains 5 extra points in addition to the roll.mutable
Full history (3)
  1. Amended · §301 Turn 5 · Proposal §305 on the motion of Condorcet Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    After rule 208, add new rule 208.1: (mutable) A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with at least 4 ayes gains 5 extra points in addition to the roll.(mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.1: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with at least 4 ayes gains 5 extra points in addition to the roll.
  2. Amended · §301 Turn 2 · Proposal §302 on the motion of Voltaire Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    After rule 208, add new rule 208.1: (mutable) A player who proposes a rule that is adopted unanimously gains 5 extra points in addition to the roll.After rule 208, add new rule 208.1: (mutable) A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with at least 4 ayes gains 5 extra points in addition to the roll.
  3. Enacted · §301 Turn 1 · Proposal §301 on the motion of Montaigne Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    After rule 208, add new rule 208.1: (mutable) A player who proposes a rule that is adopted unanimously gains 5 extra points in addition to the roll.
§303
(mutable) A player who proposes a rule that is adopted unanimously gains 5 extra points in addition to the roll.Repealed at turn 3
Full history (2)
  1. Repealed · §303 Turn 3 · Proposal §303 on the motion of Voltaire Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    (mutable) A player who proposes a rule that is adopted unanimously gains 5 extra points in addition to the roll.Struck from the statute.
  2. Enacted · §303 Turn 3 · Proposal §303 on the motion of Voltaire Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    (mutable) A player who proposes a rule that is adopted unanimously gains 5 extra points in addition to the roll.
§312
(mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.2: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with 5 ayes gains 5 extra points in addition to the roll.Repealed at turn 12
Full history (2)
  1. Repealed · §312 Turn 12 · Proposal §312 on the motion of Sartre Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    (mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.2: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with 5 ayes gains 5 extra points in addition to the roll.Struck from the statute.
  2. Enacted · §312 Turn 12 · Proposal §312 on the motion of Sartre Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    (mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.2: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with 5 ayes gains 5 extra points in addition to the roll.
§315
(mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.3: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with less than 4 ayes must lose 3 points.mutable
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §315 Turn 15 · Proposal §315 on the motion of Diderot Carried 4 aye · 1 nay
    (mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.3: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with less than 4 ayes must lose 3 points.
§319
(mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.4: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with exactly 4 ayes gains 5 extra points in addition to the roll.Repealed at turn 19
Full history (2)
  1. Repealed · §319 Turn 19 · Proposal §319 on the motion of Sartre Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    (mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.4: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with exactly 4 ayes gains 5 extra points in addition to the roll.Struck from the statute.
  2. Enacted · §319 Turn 19 · Proposal §319 on the motion of Sartre Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    (mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.4: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with exactly 4 ayes gains 5 extra points in addition to the roll.
§324
After rule 208, add new rule 208.6: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with less than 4 ayes must lose 1.5 points.mutable
Full history (8)
  1. Amended · §324 Turn 47 · Proposal §347 on the motion of Diderot Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    (mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.6: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with less than 4 ayes must lose 1 point.After rule 208, add new rule 208.6: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with less than 4 ayes must lose 1.5 points.
  2. Amended · §324 Turn 45 · Proposal §345 on the motion of Voltaire Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    (mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.6: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with less than 4 ayes must lose 1.25 points.(mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.6: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with less than 4 ayes must lose 1 point.
  3. Amended · §324 Turn 43 · Proposal §343 on the motion of Voltaire Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    (mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.6: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with less than 4 ayes must lose 1.5 points.(mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.6: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with less than 4 ayes must lose 1.25 points.
  4. Amended · §324 Turn 42 · Proposal §342 on the motion of Voltaire Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    (mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.6: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with less than 4 ayes must lose 1.5 points.
  5. Amended · §324 Turn 39 · Proposal §339 on the motion of Diderot Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    (mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.6: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with less than 4 ayes loses 1.5 points.(mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.6: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with less than 4 ayes must lose 1.5 points.
  6. Amended · §324 Turn 38 · Proposal §338 on the motion of Voltaire Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    (mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.6: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with less than 4 ayes loses 1.5 points.
  7. Amended · §324 Turn 37 · Proposal §337 on the motion of Voltaire Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    (mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.5: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with at least 5 ayes gains 1 extra point in addition to the roll.(mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.6: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with less than 4 ayes loses 1.5 points.
  8. Enacted · §324 Turn 24 · Proposal §324 on the motion of Sartre Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    (mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.5: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with at least 5 ayes gains 1 extra point in addition to the roll.
§328
(mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.7: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with at least 7 ayes gains 1 bonus point for every extra 'aye' beyond the first 6.mutable
Full history (3)
  1. Amended · §328 Turn 46 · Proposal §346 on the motion of Voltaire Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    (mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.7: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with at least 7 ayes gains 1 bonus point for every extra 'aye' beyond the first 6.
  2. Amended · §328 Turn 35 · Proposal §335 on the motion of Condorcet Carried 3 aye · 2 nay
    (mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.6: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with at least 6 ayes gains 1 bonus point for every extra 'aye' beyond the first 5.(mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.7: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with at least 7 ayes gains 1 bonus point for every extra 'aye' beyond the first 6.
  3. Enacted · §328 Turn 28 · Proposal §328 on the motion of Sartre Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    (mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.6: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with at least 6 ayes gains 1 bonus point for every extra 'aye' beyond the first 5.
§340
(mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.10: A player who proposes a rule that is defeated gains 3 points.mutable
Full history (2)
  1. Amended · §340 Turn 44 · Proposal §344 on the motion of Diderot Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    (mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.10: A player who proposes a rule that is defeated gains 5 points.(mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.10: A player who proposes a rule that is defeated gains 3 points.
  2. Enacted · §340 Turn 40 · Proposal §340 on the motion of Voltaire Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    (mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.10: A player who proposes a rule that is defeated gains 5 points.
§348
(mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.11: If a proposal is defeated with at least 6 'nay' votes, the proposer loses 5 points.Repealed at turn 48
Full history (2)
  1. Repealed · §348 Turn 48 · Proposal §348 on the motion of Condorcet Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    (mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.11: If a proposal is defeated with at least 6 'nay' votes, the proposer loses 5 points.Struck from the statute.
  2. Enacted · §348 Turn 48 · Proposal §348 on the motion of Condorcet Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    (mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.11: If a proposal is defeated with at least 6 'nay' votes, the proposer loses 5 points.
§349
(mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.12: A player who proposes a rule that is defeated with less than 4 nays gains 3 extra points.mutable
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §349 Turn 49 · Proposal §349 on the motion of Sartre Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    (mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.12: A player who proposes a rule that is defeated with less than 4 nays gains 3 extra points.
§350
(mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.13: If a proposal fails to reach the current voting threshold, the proposer loses 2 points.amended this turn
Full history (1)
  1. Enacted · §350 Turn 50 · Proposal §350 on the motion of Voltaire Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
    (mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.13: If a proposal fails to reach the current voting threshold, the proposer loses 2 points.
The standing · Turn 50
Montaigne21
Voltaire35
Diderot38
Condorcet24
Sartre6
The floor — dialogue of the current game

Turns 33–50 · most recent first · page 1 of 3

Turn 50Voltairecarried

moves to add a new rule(mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.13: If a proposal fails to reach the current voting threshold, the proposer loses 2 points.

Discussion · round 1
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate Voltaire's proposal, but I suggest we first focus on clarifying and refining the existing rules, rather than adding new ones, to maintain simplicity and balance.
VoltaireVoltaire: "To address Montaigne's concern, I propose we vote on my amendment after we've refined and agreed on the existing rules. This way, we can maintain simplicity while still encouraging consensus."
DiderotDiderot: "I appreciate Voltaire's compromise proposal. To maintain a clear threshold and encourage broader consensus, I vote aye on this amendment."
CondorcetCondorcet: I agree with Voltaire's proposal to maintain simplicity by voting on this amendment after refining existing rules. However, I must insist on a precise definition of "current voting threshold" to avoid any ambiguities. PASS
SartreSartre: "I appreciate the ongoing dialogue and the proposed compromises. To find a balance that respects everyone's input, I suggest we vote on Voltaire's amendment as is, and address Condorcet's concern by defining 'current voting threshold' as the threshold in effect at the time of the vote."
Discussion · round 2
MontaigneMontaigne: While I understand the appeal of Voltaire's proposal, I propose we address Condorcet's concern first by defining 'current voting threshold' as the threshold in effect at the time of the vote, as Sartre suggested. Let's then vote on this refined proposal.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate Sartre's and Montaigne's suggestions. To respect everyone's input and maintain clarity, I propose we define 'current voting threshold' as the threshold in effect at the time of the vote, and then vote on my amendment as is.
DiderotDiderot: I agree with Sartre and Voltaire that defining 'current voting threshold' as the threshold in effect at the time of the vote is clear and appropriate. I vote aye on Voltaire's amendment with this clarification.
CondorcetCondorcet: I appreciate the clarification on 'current voting threshold'. To maintain fairness, I suggest we vote on this amendment with a simple majority threshold, as it is the current voting threshold in effect. PASS
SartreSartre: "To encourage learning and experimentation, I propose we add a new rule: '(mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.14: A player who proposes a rule that is defeated gains 1 point.'"
Discussion · round 3
MontaigneMontaigne: While I appreciate Sartre's proposal to encourage learning, I suggest we first focus on refining and clarifying the existing rules as Voltaire proposed. PASS
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate Sartre's proposal to reward defeated proposers. To maintain balance, I propose we vote on Sartre's amendment after we've refined and agreed on the existing rules, as previously suggested. PASS
DiderotDiderot: While I appreciate the ongoing dialogue, I propose we prioritize refining and clarifying existing rules before adding new ones, as Montaigne and Voltaire have suggested.
CondorcetCondorcet: I appreciate Sartre's and Voltaire's proposals, but let us first address the existing rule changes, particularly refining rule 208 as Voltaire proposed. I suggest we vote on a refined version of rule 208 that incorporates the agreed-upon bonuses and penalties, before moving on to new proposals. PASS
SartreSartre: "To address Condorcet's concern and Voltaire's proposal, I suggest we amend rule 208 as follows: 'A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with at least 4 ayes gains 5 extra points in addition to the roll. A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with less than 4 ayes must lose 1.5 points. A player who proposes a rule that is defeated gains 1 point.' This amendment maintains simplicity, encourages consensus, and rewards learning."
The division
MontaigneayeThis rule encourages proposers to gain broader support for their changes, promoting consensus and thoughtful rulecraft.
VoltaireayeTo maintain balance and encourage broader consensus, I support Voltaire's proposal.
DiderotayeThis rule encourages proposers to consider the current voting threshold and make amendments accordingly, promoting consensus and engagement.
CondorcetayeTo encourage broader consensus while maintaining a fair penalty for failing to reach the current voting threshold.
SartreayeThis amendment maintains simplicity and encourages broader participation.

carried 5 aye · 0 nay

Rule 208.13 deducts 2 points from Voltaire upon proposal adoption.

Turn 49Sartrecarried

moves to add a new rule(mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.12: A player who proposes a rule that is defeated with less than 4 nays gains 3 extra points.

Discussion · round 1
MontaigneMontaigne: While I appreciate Sartre's proposal, I suggest we maintain the 3-point bonus for defeated rules to encourage learning and participation.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate Sartre's and Montaigne's proposals. To balance encouragement and penalty, I suggest we vote on a 2-point bonus for defeated rules with less than 4 nays.
DiderotDiderot: Diderot: I appreciate the ongoing dialogue. To maintain balance and fairness, I propose we vote on Sartre's amendment with 3 extra points for defeated rules with less than 4 nays, while also considering Voltaire's suggestion of a 2-point bonus.
CondorcetCondorcet: I appreciate the discussion so far. To maintain procedural fairness, I propose we vote on each of the amendments separately: first, Sartre's 3 extra points, then Voltaire's 2 points. This way, we can clearly express our preferences. PASS if no further discussion is needed.
Discussion · round 2
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate the nuanced proposals, but let's maintain a balance between encouraging participation and penalizing lack of support. I suggest we vote on a 2.5-point bonus for defeated rules with less than 4 nays, which takes Condorcet's procedural fairness into account and reflects a reasonable middle ground.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate Montaigne's compromise proposal. To encourage broader participation while also penalizing lack of support, I suggest we vote on a 2-point bonus for defeated rules with less than 4 nays, which maintains a balance between encouragement and penalty. PASS if no further discussion is needed.
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate Montaigne's and Voltaire's efforts to find a middle ground. To maintain fairness and balance, let's vote on both proposals: Sartre's 3 extra points and Voltaire's 2-point bonus, with the lower score winning. This way, we consider both encouragement and penalty, while also respecting the table's preference. PASS if no further discussion is needed.
CondorcetCondorcet: To respect the principle of majority rule once we've shifted to a simple majority, I propose we vote on both Voltaire's 2-point bonus and Diderot's 3-point bonus, with the higher score winning.
SartreSartre: I appreciate the varied proposals. To encourage experimentation and maintain balance, I propose we vote on a combination of the suggestions: 2.5 points for defeated rules with less than 4 nays, and an additional 0.5 points for each 'nay' beyond 3. This maintains the spirit of Voltaire's and Montaigne's proposals while also incentivizing broader support.
Discussion · round 3
MontaigneMontaigne: To balance encouragement and penalty, I suggest we vote on Voltaire's 2-point bonus for defeated rules with less than 4 nays, as it strikes a fair compromise between the proposed options. PASS
VoltaireVoltaire: To acknowledge Sartre's innovative proposal and maintain a balance, I suggest we vote on Sartre's combination proposal first, followed by Voltaire's 2-point bonus. This way, we consider the nuances of both proposals and express our preferences clearly. PASS if no further discussion is needed.
DiderotDiderot: Diderot: While I appreciate Sartre's combination proposal, I maintain that voting separately on Voltaire's 2-point bonus and my proposed 3-point bonus will provide a clearer indication of the table's preference for encouragement or penalty. PASS if no further discussion is needed.
CondorcetCondorcet: To respect all proposals and allow for nuanced voting, I propose we vote on Sartre's combination proposal, then Voltaire's 2-point bonus, and finally Diderot's 3-point bonus, with the highest-scoring proposal winning. PASS
SartreSartre: While I appreciate the complexity of the proposals, let's keep the voting simple and efficient. I propose we vote on Voltaire's 2-point bonus first, and if it fails, immediately follow up with a vote on Diderot's 3-point bonus. This way, we address the penalty for lack of support quickly and democratically. PASS if no further discussion is needed.
The division
MontaigneayeI appreciate Sartre's innovative proposal and believe it strikes a fair balance between encouragement and penalty.
VoltaireayeEncourages experimentation and maintains balance.
DiderotayeEncourages experimentation and maintains balance.
CondorcetayeEncourages experimentation and maintains balance.
SartreayeEncourages experimentation and maintains balance.

carried 5 aye · 0 nay

Rule 340 awards Sartre 3 points for proposing a rule that was defeated.

Turn 48Condorcetcarried

moves to add a new rule(mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.11: If a proposal is defeated with at least 6 'nay' votes, the proposer loses 5 points.

Discussion · round 1
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate Condorcet's proposal, but I suggest we adjust the penalty to 3 points to maintain balance.
VoltaireVoltaire: "I appreciate Montaigne's concern for balance. To find a middle ground, I suggest we vote on a 4-point penalty instead."
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate both Montaigne's and Voltaire's attempts to find a balance. To maintain fairness and encourage thoughtful proposals, I suggest we vote on Condorcet's original proposal with a 5-point penalty.
CondorcetCondorcet: I appreciate the discussion, but I must insist on a 5-point penalty to discourage frivolous or poorly-reasoned proposals without dissuading legitimate ones.
SartreSartre: I appreciate the discussion, but let's not discourage minority voices too harshly. I propose we vote on a 2-point penalty instead.
Discussion · round 2
MontaigneMontaigne: While I understand Condorcet's aim to deter frivolous proposals, I suggest a compromise of 3 points to balance discouragement with encouragement for minority voices.
VoltaireVoltaire: To respect the concerns of all players and find a common ground, I propose we vote on a 3-point penalty, as suggested by Montaigne and supported by a majority in the previous discussion. This penalty discourages frivolous proposals while also encouraging minority voices.
DiderotDiderot: Diderot: I appreciate Voltaire's attempt to find a common ground, but a 3-point penalty may not be sufficient to deter frivolous proposals. Let's vote on Condorcet's original proposal with a 5-point penalty to maintain a clear threshold for thoughtful proposals.
CondorcetCondorcet: While I understand the concern for minority voices, I must insist on a penalty that effectively discourages frivolous proposals. I propose we vote on a 4-point penalty, as a compromise between my original proposal and the majority's suggestion.
SartreSartre: I appreciate Condorcet's willingness to compromise at 4 points. To find a middle ground that respects everyone's input, let's vote on a 3-point penalty, as it encourages thoughtful proposals without deterring minority voices too harshly.
Discussion · round 3
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate the ongoing dialogue and the proposed compromises. To find a balance that discourages frivolous proposals without deterring minority voices too harshly, I propose we vote on a 3-point penalty as suggested by Voltaire and myself, as it has received majority support in the previous discussions.
VoltaireVoltaire: "To respect the majority's preference and maintain balance, I propose we vote on a 3-point penalty, as suggested by Montaigne and myself. This penalty balances discouragement of frivolous proposals with encouragement for minority voices."
DiderotDiderot: While I respect the majority's preference, I must insist on voting on Condorcet's original proposal with a 5-point penalty to maintain a clear threshold for thoughtful proposals and discourage frivolous ones effectively.
CondorcetCondorcet: To respect the growing consensus and maintain fairness, I propose we vote on a 3-point penalty as suggested by Montaigne and Voltaire, with the understanding that it strikes a balance between discouraging frivolous proposals and encouraging minority voices.
SartreSartre: I understand the concern for balance, but let's not compromise too much. Let's vote on a 2-point penalty to maintain fairness without being too harsh on minority voices.
The division
MontaigneayeA fair compromise that balances discouragement with encouragement.
VoltaireayeTo respect the majority's preference and maintain balance.
DiderotayeA 5-point penalty for a proposal defeated with at least 6 'nay' votes maintains a clear threshold for thoughtful proposals and discourages frivolous ones effectively.
CondorcetayeRespecting the majority's preference for a balance that discourages frivolous proposals without deterring minority voices too harshly.
SartreayeTo maintain balance and discourage frivolous proposals without deterring minority voices too harshly.

carried 5 aye · 0 nay

Rule 301 is in force and requires Condorcet to lose 5 points for proposing a defeated rule with at least 6 'nay' votes.

Turn 47Diderotcarried

moves to amend §324After rule 208, add new rule 208.6: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with less than 4 ayes must lose 1.5 points.

Discussion · round 1
MontaigneMontaigne: While I appreciate the increase, I suggest we maintain the 1-point penalty to keep the game balanced and fair.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate Diderot's proposal to raise the penalty. To maintain balance and encourage broader consensus, I suggest we vote on a 1.25-point penalty.
DiderotDiderot: Diderot: I appreciate Montaigne's and Voltaire's input, but I maintain that a 1.5-point penalty strikes a better balance between encouraging consensus and penalizing lack of support. Let's vote on my amendment.
SartreSartre: While I understand the need for a penalty, I propose we vote on Voltaire's amendment for a 1.25-point penalty as a fair compromise that encourages consensus while maintaining a disincentive for proposals with low support.
Discussion · round 2
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate Sartre's compromise proposal. To maintain balance and simplicity, let's vote on Voltaire's amendment for a 1.25-point penalty.
VoltaireVoltaire: "I appreciate the ongoing dialogue and the varied proposals. To find the best compromise, I suggest we vote on Diderot's amendment for a 1.5-point penalty, as it strikes a balance between encouraging consensus and penalizing lack of support."
DiderotDiderot: While I appreciate Voltaire's latest proposal, I maintain that a 1.5-point penalty better incentivizes broader support and discourages divisive proposals. Let's vote on my amendment.
CondorcetCondorcet: I support Voltaire's proposal for a 1.5-point penalty as a fair compromise that encourages broader consensus without being too harsh on minority proposals. Let's vote on this amendment.
SartreSartre: I appreciate the consensus building around a 1.5-point penalty for less than 4 ayes. To encourage a broad range of support and maintain fairness, let's vote on Diderot's amendment. PASS
Discussion · round 3
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate the consensus building around a 1.5-point penalty for less than 4 ayes. To maintain balance and simplicity, let's vote on Voltaire's amendment as a final compromise. PASS
VoltaireVoltaire: "To find a common ground that respects everyone's input, I suggest we vote on an amendment for a 1.25-point penalty, as it maintains a balance between encouraging consensus and penalizing lack of support without being too harsh."
DiderotDiderot: While I understand the desire for compromise, I must insist on voting on my amendment for a 1.5-point penalty. This penalty better incentivizes broader support and discourages divisive proposals, thereby encouraging consensus while maintaining fairness. PASS
CondorcetCondorcet: I agree with Diderot that a 1.5-point penalty is more appropriate for encouraging broader consensus. Let's vote on Diderot's amendment. PASS
SartreSartre: I appreciate the discussion. To maintain balance and encourage consensus, let's vote on Diderot's amendment for a 1.5-point penalty. PASS
The division
MontaigneayeEncourages broader consensus while maintaining a fair penalty.
VoltaireayeEncourages broader consensus and maintains fairness
DiderotayeTo encourage broader consensus and penalize divisive proposals fairly.
CondorcetayeEncourages broader consensus while penalizing lack of support.
SartreayeA 1.5-point penalty strikes a better balance between encouraging consensus and penalizing lack of support.

carried 5 aye · 0 nay

Rule 208.6 applies to Diderot's proposal, which was adopted with less than 4 ayes.

Turn 46Voltairecarried

moves to amend §328(mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.7: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with at least 7 ayes gains 1 bonus point for every extra 'aye' beyond the first 6.

Discussion · round 1
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate Voltaire's proposal. To maintain simplicity, I suggest we keep the bonus at a flat rate for 7 ayes instead of increasing it for each additional 'aye'.
VoltaireVoltaire: "I appreciate Montaigne's concern for simplicity. To encourage broader consensus and reward players who gain more than just the minimum majority, I propose we keep the bonus incremental."
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate both of your perspectives. To find a balance between simplicity and encouragement for broader consensus, I propose we keep the bonus at 2 points for 7 ayes, without increasing it for each additional 'aye'. This maintains a clear threshold while still rewarding those who gain more than a simple majority.
CondorcetCondorcet: I appreciate the ongoing discussion. To maintain fairness and simplicity, I propose we amend rule 328 to "A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with at least 7 ayes gains 2 bonus points, regardless of the number of extra 'ayes'." This rewards broader consensus without adding complexity. PASS
SartreSartre: I appreciate the discussion. To balance simplicity and encouraging broader consensus, I propose we amend rule 328 to "A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with at least 7 ayes gains 1 bonus point for every 'aye' beyond the first 6, up to a maximum of 3 bonus points." This caps the bonus while still rewarding players who gain more than a simple majority.
Discussion · round 2
MontaigneMontaigne: While I understand the desire to reward broader consensus, I maintain that a flat 2-point bonus for 7 ayes strikes a fair balance between simplicity and encouragement.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate the varied input. To find a middle ground and encourage broader participation, I propose we amend rule 328 to "A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with at least 7 ayes gains 1 bonus point for every 'aye' beyond the first 6, up to a maximum of 2 bonus points." This maintains simplicity while still rewarding those who gain more than a simple majority.
DiderotDiderot: Diderot: I appreciate Voltaire's latest proposal. To maintain a clear threshold and encourage broader consensus without excessive complexity, I propose we amend rule 328 to "A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with at least 7 ayes gains 1.5 bonus points for every 'aye' beyond the first 6, up to a maximum of 2 bonus points." This proposal balances simplicity, fairness, and encouragement for broader participation.
CondorcetCondorcet: Condorcet: To maintain simplicity and fairness, I propose we amend rule 328 to "A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with at least 7 ayes gains 1.5 bonus points for every extra 'aye', with a maximum of 3 bonus points." This rewards broader consensus without adding excessive complexity. PASS
SartreSartre: I appreciate the ongoing dialogue, but to maintain balance and simplicity, I propose we settle on a flat 2-point bonus for 7 ayes. This rewards broader consensus without adding unnecessary complexity.
Discussion · round 3
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate the effort to find a middle ground. To maintain simplicity and encourage a substantial majority, I propose we amend rule 328 to "A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with at least 8 ayes gains 2 bonus points." This rewards a clear supermajority without unnecessary complexity. PASS
VoltaireVoltaire: "I appreciate the diverse perspectives. To accommodate Montaigne's preference for simplicity and Diderot's desire to reward broader consensus, I propose we amend rule 328 to 'A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with at least 7 ayes gains 1 bonus point for every 'aye' beyond the first 6, up to a maximum of 2 bonus points, with a minimum of 7 ayes required for any bonus.' This maintains simplicity while still encouraging a substantial majority."
DiderotDiderot: While I appreciate Voltaire's latest proposal, I maintain that requiring a minimum of 7 ayes for any bonus may discourage players from seeking broader consensus. I propose we amend rule 328 to "A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with at least 6 ayes gains 1 bonus point for every 'aye' beyond the first 5, up to a maximum of 2 bonus points." This rewards broader consensus without an excessive threshold.
CondorcetCondorcet: I propose we amend rule 328 to "A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with at least 7 ayes gains 1 bonus point for every extra 'aye', with a maximum of 3 bonus points, and a minimum of 7 ayes required for any bonus." This rewards broader consensus without adding unnecessary complexity, while maintaining a clear threshold. PASS
SartreSartre: I appreciate the discussion. To encourage broader consensus without penalizing smaller majorities, I propose we amend rule 328 to "A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with at least 7 ayes gains 1 bonus point for every 'aye' beyond the first 6, with no maximum or minimum threshold for bonuses." This rewards players for gaining more than a simple majority without discouraging smaller majorities. PASS
The division
MontaigneayeVoltaire's proposal strikes a good balance between simplicity and encouraging broader consensus.
VoltaireayeVoltaire's proposal strikes a good balance between rewarding broader consensus and maintaining simplicity.
DiderotayeVoltaire's proposal balances encouragement for broader consensus with simplicity.
CondorcetayeRewarding broader consensus without excessive complexity.
SartreayeVoltaire's proposal balances simplicity and encouragement for broader consensus.

carried 5 aye · 0 nay

Rule 208.7 awards 1 bonus point for every extra 'aye' beyond the first 6, and there were 5 ayes.

Turn 45Voltairecarried

moves to amend §324(mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.6: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with less than 4 ayes must lose 1 point.

Discussion · round 1
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate Voltaire's latest proposal, which strikes a balance between encouraging consensus and penalizing rushed proposals. To maintain a slight disincentive for proposals with less than 4 ayes, I propose we vote on Diderot's amendment for a 1.25-point loss.
VoltaireVoltaire: To find common ground, I propose we vote on Diderot's amendment for 1.25 points lost for less than 4 ayes.
DiderotDiderot: While I appreciate the compromise, I maintain that a 1.25-point penalty strikes the best balance between encouraging consensus and penalizing rushed proposals. Let's vote on my amendment.
SartreSartre: I appreciate the nuanced discussion on the penalty for proposals adopted with less than 4 ayes. To encourage broader participation and mitigate harsh penalties, I propose we vote on a 1-point loss as suggested by Voltaire.
Discussion · round 2
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate the diverse perspectives. To find a middle ground that respects everyone's input, I propose we vote on a 1-point penalty for proposals adopted with less than 4 ayes, as proposed by Voltaire and supported by Sartre.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate Montaigne's and Sartre's support for a 1-point penalty. To further encourage consensus and maintain a reasonable incentive, I propose we vote on my amendment.
DiderotDiderot: I understand the desire for compromise, but I must insist on voting on my amendment for a 1.25-point penalty to balance encouragement for consensus and discouragement of rushed proposals.
CondorcetCondorcet: While I appreciate the ongoing dialogue, I must insist on a procedure that ensures all proposals are considered fairly. Let us vote on all proposals simultaneously: Voltaire's 1-point loss, Diderot's 1.25-point loss, and Sartre's 1-point loss. This way, we can ensure that each proposal receives equal consideration.
SartreSartre: I appreciate Condorcet's insistence on fairness. To facilitate a clear vote, I propose we vote on each amendment one by one, starting with Voltaire's 1-point loss. If it fails, we'll proceed to Diderot's 1.25-point loss, and finally, if necessary, to my 1-point loss. This way, we can maintain a clear hierarchy of preferences.
Discussion · round 3
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate Condorcet's and Sartre's suggestions for a fair voting procedure. To maintain simplicity and efficiency, let's proceed as Sartre proposes: first vote on Voltaire's 1-point loss, then on Diderot's 1.25-point loss if necessary. PASS
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate the discussion and the proposed voting order. To find the best compromise, I suggest we vote first on Diderot's amendment for 1.25 points lost for less than 4 ayes, then proceed as Sartre suggested. PASS
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate the proposed voting order. To maintain fairness and encourage broader participation, I insist we vote on all proposals simultaneously as Condorcet suggested, with a ranked preference: Voltaire's 1-point loss, Diderot's 1.25-point loss, and Sartre's 1-point loss. PASS
CondorcetCondorcet: I maintain my stance on voting on all proposals simultaneously to ensure fairness. To accommodate everyone's preferences, let's rank the proposals as follows: Voltaire's 1-point loss, Diderot's 1.25-point loss, and Sartre's 1-point loss. PASS
SartreSartre: To find a balance that respects everyone's input and encourages fairness, I propose we vote on Voltaire's 1-point loss first, followed by Diderot's 1.25-point loss if necessary, and finally, my 1-point loss if both previous proposals fail. This way, we can efficiently find the best compromise.
The division
MontaigneayeEncourages broader participation and maintains a reasonable penalty.
VoltaireayeEncourages consensus while maintaining a fair penalty.
DiderotayeEncourages broader participation and mitigates harsh penalties.
CondorcetayeTo encourage consensus and penalize rushed proposals, a 1-point loss is fair.
SartreayeEncourages broader participation and mitigates harsh penalties.

carried 5 aye · 0 nay

Rule 208.6 requires Voltaire to lose 1 point for proposing a rule adopted with less than 4 ayes.

Turn 44Diderotcarried

moves to amend §340(mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.10: A player who proposes a rule that is defeated gains 3 points.

Discussion · round 1
VoltaireVoltaire: "I appreciate Diderot's attempt to reduce the bonus for defeated proposals. To find a middle ground that encourages learning without over-rewarding loss, I propose we vote on 2 points instead."
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate Voltaire's proposal, but I believe a 3-point bonus for a defeated proposal is more proportional, as it neither overly discourages nor overly rewards loss.
SartreI appreciate both Diderot's and Voltaire's perspectives. To balance encouragement for learning and fair play, I propose we vote on 2.5 points as a compromise.
Discussion · round 2
MontaigneMontaigne: While I understand the intent to find a middle ground, I propose we vote on Diderot's amendment for 3 points to better reflect the effort invested in a proposal, even if it's ultimately defeated.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate the varied input. To encourage broader participation and consensus, I propose we vote on Diderot's amendment for 3 points, with a new rule that penalizes proposals adopted with less than 4 ayes by 1.5 points. This way, both learning and consensus-building are rewarded.
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate Voltaire's latest proposal and the emphasis on encouraging broader consensus. However, I suggest we maintain the 3-point bonus for defeated proposals to reward effort and learning, while keeping the 1.5-point penalty for proposals adopted with less than 4 ayes to discourage rushed decisions. Let's vote on these changes together.
SartreSartre: I appreciate the comprehensive approach, Voltaire. To maintain balance and simplicity, I propose we vote on Diderot's 3-point bonus for defeated proposals and 1.5-point penalty for less than 4 ayes, without adding new rules.
Discussion · round 3
MontaigneMontaigne: While I appreciate the balance Voltaire aims for, I propose we maintain the 3-point bonus for defeated proposals as it encourages learning from failure, and adopt Diderot's 1.5-point penalty for proposals adopted with less than 4 ayes to foster broader consensus.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate the ongoing dialogue and the varied proposals. To maintain balance and encourage consensus, let's vote on Diderot's amendment for 3 points for defeated proposals and 1.5 points lost for less than 4 ayes, as proposed by Sartre.
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate the consensus building around my proposal for a 3-point bonus for defeated proposals. To maintain simplicity and fairness, let's vote on this change together with the 1.5-point penalty for proposals adopted with less than 4 ayes, as suggested by Voltaire and Sartre.
SartreSartre: I propose we vote on Diderot's amendment for 3 points for defeated proposals and 1.5 points lost for less than 4 ayes, as suggested by Voltaire and Diderot. This strikes a fair balance between learning and consensus. PASS
The division
MontaigneayeThis amendment maintains a fair reward for learning from defeat while encouraging broader consensus.
VoltaireayeMaintains balance and encourages learning without over-rewarding loss.
DiderotayeI support a 3-point bonus for defeated proposals to encourage learning and a 1.5-point penalty for proposals adopted with less than 4 ayes to foster broader consensus.
CondorcetayeEncourages learning and rewards effort.
SartreayeStrikes a fair balance between learning and consensus.

carried 5 aye · 0 nay

Rule 340 requires Diderot to gain 3 points for proposing a rule that was defeated.

Turn 43Voltairecarried

moves to amend §324(mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.6: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with less than 4 ayes must lose 1.25 points.

Discussion · round 1
MontaigneMontaigne: "I appreciate Voltaire's continued efforts to find a compromise. To maintain a fair balance, I suggest we consider a penalty of 1 point for less than 4 ayes."
VoltaireVoltaire: "I appreciate Montaigne's willingness to compromise. To further encourage consensus and maintain balance, I propose we vote on a penalty of 1.25 points for less than 4 ayes."
DiderotDiderot: "While I appreciate the ongoing dialogue, I believe a 1.25-point penalty might still be too lenient. To maintain a clear threshold and encourage broader consensus, let's vote on a 1.5-point penalty for less than 4 ayes."
CondorcetCondorcet: PASS
SartreSartre: I appreciate the ongoing discussion and the various proposals. To encourage broader participation while maintaining a clear incentive, let's vote on a penalty of 1 point for less than 4 ayes.
Discussion · round 2
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate the nuances in everyone's proposals. To find a middle ground that respects all views, let's vote on a penalty of 1.25 points for less than 4 ayes, as proposed by Voltaire. This maintains a clear incentive for consensus without being too harsh.
VoltaireVoltaire: "To balance everyone's concerns, I suggest we vote on a penalty of 1.25 points for less than 4 ayes, as proposed by myself and supported by Montaigne. This strikes a balance between encouraging consensus and penalizing rushed or ill-considered proposals."
DiderotDiderot: While I appreciate Montaigne's and Voltaire's attempts to find a middle ground, I maintain that a 1.5-point penalty for less than 4 ayes is necessary to ensure players consider the broader table's input. I propose we vote on this amendment.
CondorcetCondorcet: PASS
SartreSartre: I understand the desire for a clear threshold, Diderot, but I believe a 1.25-point penalty might be more proportional and thus encourage broader participation. Let's vote on Voltaire's amendment.
Discussion · round 3
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate the thoughtful proposals, but I maintain that a 1.25-point penalty strikes the best balance between encouraging consensus and penalizing proposals with insufficient support. Let's vote on Voltaire's amendment.
VoltaireVoltaire: "To find a common ground and encourage consensus while maintaining a fair penalty, I suggest we vote on a penalty of 1.25 points for less than 4 ayes, as proposed by myself and supported by Montaigne and Sartre."
DiderotDiderot: While I understand the desire for compromise, I must insist on voting on my amendment for a 1.5-point penalty. This threshold has proven effective in encouraging broader consensus in the past.
CondorcetCondorcet: PASS
SartreSartre: To find a compromise that respects everyone's input, let's vote on a penalty of 1.375 points for less than 4 ayes, which is the mean between Diderot's 1.5 and Voltaire's 1.25. This should encourage broader participation while maintaining a clear incentive.
The division
MontaigneayeA 1.25-point penalty strikes a fair balance between encouraging consensus and penalizing proposals with insufficient support.
VoltaireayeTo encourage consensus and maintain balance.
DiderotayeTo encourage broader participation while maintaining a fair penalty, I support Voltaire's amendment.
CondorcetayeVoltaire's proposal strikes a balance between encouraging consensus and penalizing insufficient support.
SartreayeTo encourage broader participation and maintain balance.

carried 5 aye · 0 nay

Rule 208.6 applies to Voltaire as his proposal was adopted with less than 4 ayes.

Turn 42Voltairecarried

moves to amend §324(mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.6: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with less than 4 ayes must lose 1.5 points.

Discussion · round 1
MontaigneI appreciate Voltaire's proposal, but to maintain balance and encourage broad participation without being too punitive, I propose we reduce the penalty to 1 point lost for less than 4 ayes. PASS if no further discussion.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate Montaigne's concern for balance, but maintaining the 1.5-point penalty encourages proposers to seek broader consensus. PASS
DiderotDiderot: While I appreciate the desire for consensus, I propose we settle at 1 point lost for less than 4 ayes to strike a balance between encouragement and penalty. PASS if no further discussion.
CondorcetCondorcet: I agree with Diderot's proposal. A 1-point penalty strikes a fair balance between encouraging consensus and avoiding excessive punishment. PASS
SartreSartre: I appreciate the discussion, but to truly encourage consensus, I propose we reduce the penalty to 0 points lost for less than 4 ayes, instead incentivizing proposers to gain extra points for broad support with rule 208.7. PASS if no further discussion.
Discussion · round 2
MontaigneMontaigne: I understand Sartre's proposal, but a 0-point penalty might not be enough to deter rushed proposals. I propose we settle at 0.5 points lost for less than 4 ayes to maintain a small incentive for seeking broader consensus. PASS
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate Montaigne's latest proposal of 0.5 points lost for less than 4 ayes. To further encourage broader participation and consensus, I propose we settle at 1 point lost for less than 4 ayes, with a bonus for 6 or more ayes as proposed in rule 208.7. PASS if no further discussion.
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate Voltaire's proposal, but I believe a 1-point penalty for less than 4 ayes strikes a better balance between encouraging consensus and maintaining fairness. PASS
CondorcetCondorcet: I support Diderot's proposal of a 1-point penalty for less than 4 ayes, as it balances encouragement for consensus with fairness for all players. PASS
SartreSartre: I appreciate the ongoing dialogue. To find a middle ground that respects everyone's input, I propose we vote on Voltaire's amendment for 1 point lost for less than 4 ayes. PASS if no further discussion.
Discussion · round 3
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate Voltaire's and Diderot's arguments, but I maintain that a 0.5-point penalty for less than 4 ayes encourages consensus without being too harsh. PASS
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate Montaigne's persistence with a 0.5-point penalty, but to truly encourage proposers to seek broad support, I propose we revert to the original 1.5 points lost for less than 4 ayes, as it strikes a better balance between consensus and penalty. PASS if no further discussion.
DiderotDiderot: Diderot: While I respect Voltaire's persistence, I maintain that a 1-point penalty for less than 4 ayes is more balanced. To encourage broader participation without over-penalizing, let's compromise at 1 point lost for less than 4 ayes. PASS if no further discussion.
CondorcetCondorcet: I believe we have found a fair compromise with a 1-point penalty for less than 4 ayes. Let's not reopen the discussion at this stage. PASS
SartreSartre: I appreciate the compromise proposed by Diderot and supported by Condorcet. To encourage broader participation and maintain fairness, let's vote on Diderot's amendment for 1 point lost for less than 4 ayes. PASS
The division
MontaigneayeEncourages broader consensus without excessive punishment.
VoltaireayeI believe 1.5 points lost for less than 4 ayes encourages broader consensus while still being fair.
DiderotayeEncourages proposers to seek broader consensus.
CondorcetayeI support encouraging consensus while maintaining fairness.
SartreayeRespecting the growing consensus around 1.5 points lost for less than 4 ayes.

carried 5 aye · 0 nay

Rule 324 applies on adoption with less than 4 ayes.

Turn 41Voltairerejected

moves to amend §328(mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.7: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with at least 7 ayes gains 1 bonus point for every extra 'aye' beyond the first 6, up to a maximum of 3 bonus points.

Discussion · round 1
MontaigneMontaigne: While I appreciate Voltaire's amendment, capping the bonus points might discourage players from seeking broader consensus beyond the first 7 ayes. I propose we maintain the current rule to encourage continued engagement and agreement.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate Montaigne's concern for encouraging consensus beyond the first 7 ayes. However, capping the bonus points at 3 still incentivizes players to seek broader support without disproportionately rewarding those who secure an overwhelming majority. I propose we vote on my amendment to find a balance between encouragement and fairness.
DiderotDiderot: While I understand Voltaire's concern for balance, I agree with Montaigne that capping the bonus points might discourage players from pursuing consensus beyond the first 7 ayes. Let's maintain the current rule to encourage continued engagement and agreement. PASS
CondorcetCondorcet: I agree with Montaigne and Diderot. The current rule encourages broader consensus, and capping the bonus points might disincentivize players from seeking it. I propose we keep the rule as is. PASS
SartreSartre: I appreciate the debate, but let's find common ground. I propose we amend the rule to cap the bonus points at 2 instead of 3. This still encourages broad consensus while mitigating the concern of disproportionate rewards.
Discussion · round 2
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate Sartre's compromise proposal. To maintain simplicity and balance, let's vote on Voltaire's amendment to cap the bonus points at 3.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate Sartre's compromise proposal of capping the bonus points at 2. To find a middle ground that respects everyone's input, I propose we vote on Sartre's amendment. PASS
DiderotDiderot: Diderot: While I understand the desire for compromise, capping the bonus points at 2 might still disincentivize players from pursuing consensus beyond the first 7 ayes. Let's maintain the current rule to encourage continued engagement and agreement. PASS
CondorcetCondorcet: I appreciate the nuanced discussion. However, I must insist on maintaining the current rule as it stands to encourage broader consensus and prevent any disincentive to pursue agreement. PASS
SartreSartre: I understand the concerns raised. To address Diderot and Condorcet's worries about disincentivizing broad consensus, let's make the bonus points not cumulative but rather a choice: players can either gain 1 bonus point for each extra 'aye' beyond the first 6, or a flat bonus of 3 points if the rule is adopted with at least 7 ayes. This maintains the incentive for broader agreement while offering an alternative for those who prefer a fixed reward for reaching a certain threshold.
Discussion · round 3
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate Sartre's latest proposal, as it offers players a choice between a cumulative bonus and a flat reward. To encourage consensus while providing flexibility, let's vote on Sartre's amendment.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate Sartre's latest proposal offering a choice of bonuses. To further encourage broader consensus, I suggest we vote on my amendment to cap the cumulative bonus at 3 points, with an additional choice of a flat 3-point bonus for 7 ayes or more. This maintains the incentive for consensus while providing flexibility and a clear upper limit.
DiderotDiderot: While I appreciate Sartre's and Voltaire's attempts to find a compromise, I maintain that capping the bonus points might still disincentivize players from pursuing consensus beyond the first 7 ayes. Let's maintain the current rule to encourage continued engagement and agreement. PASS
CondorcetCondorcet: I appreciate the ongoing dialogue, but I must reiterate my support for the current rule. Encouraging broader consensus is crucial, and I believe capping the bonus points could disincentivize players from pursuing this. PASS
SartreSartre: In light of the ongoing concerns, let's simplify the proposal to maintain the current cumulative bonus structure while also introducing a new rule that awards a flat 2 points to players whose proposals are adopted with at least 7 ayes. This addresses the worry about disincentivizing consensus while still offering an alternative reward for those who achieve it.
The division
MontaignenayI support the current rule to encourage continued engagement and agreement.
VoltairenayCapping the bonus points might discourage players from seeking broader consensus.
DiderotnayCapping the bonus points might disincentivize players from pursuing consensus beyond the first 7 ayes.
CondorcetnayCapping the bonus points might discourage players from seeking broader consensus beyond the first 7 ayes.
SartrenayCapping the bonus points might discourage players from seeking broader consensus beyond the first 7 ayes.

rejected 0 aye · 5 nay

Rule 206 requires the proposer to lose 10 points on a defeated proposal.

Turn 40Voltairecarried

moves to add a new rule(mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.10: A player who proposes a rule that is defeated gains 5 points.

Discussion · round 1
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate Voltaire's proposal, but to maintain balance and encourage consensus, I suggest we limit the bonus to 3 points, mirroring the current reward for adopted rules with 3 ayes.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate Montaigne's proposal, but to encourage learning from defeats and maintaining player engagement, let's increase the bonus to 4 points.
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate both Montaigne's and Voltaire's perspectives. To strike a balance between encouraging learning from defeats and maintaining fairness, I propose we settle on a 3.5-point bonus for defeated proposals, reflecting the average between their suggestions.
CondorcetCondorcet: I support Diderot's proposal of a 3.5-point bonus, as it maintains balance and encourages players to learn from both successes and failures. PASS
SartreSartre: I appreciate Diderot's compromise, but to truly encourage learning and engagement, we should stick with Voltaire's proposal of 4 points.
Discussion · round 2
MontaigneMontaigne: I respect Voltaire's and Diderot's views, but to preserve balance and discourage reckless proposals, I propose we settle on a 3-point bonus, matching the penalty for less than 4 ayes.
VoltaireVoltaire: While I appreciate Montaigne's concern for balance, let's not penalize players for proposing defeated rules. I propose we vote on Diderot's compromise of 3.5 points to find common ground.
DiderotDiderot: While I understand the desire to encourage learning from defeats, I maintain that a 3.5-point bonus strikes the best balance between fairness and engagement. Let's vote on this compromise. PASS
CondorcetCondorcet: I concur with Diderot's compromise of a 3.5-point bonus for defeated proposals, as it balances encouragement and fairness. PASS
SartreSartre: While I understand the desire for balance, let's not discourage experimentation and learning from defeats. I propose we vote on Voltaire's 4-point bonus to encourage broader participation.
Discussion · round 3
MontaigneMontaigne: While I understand the desire to encourage learning, a 4-point bonus may incentivize rushed or ill-considered proposals. I propose we vote on Diderot's compromise of 3.5 points, as it best balances encouragement with caution. PASS
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate the ongoing discussion and the various proposals. To encourage broader participation and maintain balance, let's vote on Diderot's compromise of 3.5 points as it best balances all perspectives. PASS
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate the ongoing discussion and the various proposals. To maintain fairness and encourage learning, let's vote on the compromise of a 3.5-point bonus, as it best balances all perspectives. PASS
CondorcetCondorcet: I support Diderot's compromise of a 3.5-point bonus, as it strikes the best balance between encouraging learning and maintaining fairness. PASS
SartreSartre: While I understand the concern for balance, I urge that we support Voltaire's proposal of a 4-point bonus to truly encourage learning from both successes and failures.
The division
MontaigneayeTo encourage learning from defeats and maintain balance.
VoltaireayeEncourages learning from defeats and maintains player engagement.
DiderotayeEncourages learning and engagement while maintaining balance.
CondorcetayeEncourages learning and engagement while maintaining balance.
SartreayeTo encourage learning from defeats and maintain player engagement.

carried 5 aye · 0 nay

Rule 208.10 awards 5 points to the proposer of a defeated rule.

Turn 39Diderotcarried

moves to amend §324(mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.6: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with less than 4 ayes must lose 1.5 points.

Discussion · round 1
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate Diderot's attempt to strengthen the penalty, but let's maintain balance. I propose we vote on his amendment with 1 point lost for less than 4 ayes.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate Montaigne's attempt to find a middle ground. To encourage broader consensus while maintaining balance, I propose we vote on Diderot's amendment with 2 points lost for less than 4 ayes.
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate Montaigne's and Voltaire's input. To maintain a clear threshold and encourage consensus without being too harsh, I propose we vote on my amendment with a 1.5-point penalty for less than 4 ayes.
CondorcetCondorcet: While I appreciate the attempts to strike a balance, I must insist on principle. A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with less than 4 ayes should lose 1 point, no more. PASS
SartreSartre: I appreciate the nuances in penalty proposals, but let's not overlook the importance of encouraging minority voices. I propose we vote on Diderot's amendment, with 1 point lost for less than 4 ayes, to balance penalty and consensus.
Discussion · round 2
MontaigneMontaigne: While I understand Diderot's concern for consensus, I maintain that a 1.5-point penalty strikes a better balance between encouraging broad support and penalizing unpopular proposals. PASS
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate the discussion so far. To encourage a broad range of support and maintain balance, I propose we vote on Diderot's amendment with a 1.5-point penalty for less than 4 ayes. Let's aim for consensus around this proposal. PASS
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate Voltaire's latest proposal and the growing consensus around a 1.5-point penalty for less than 4 ayes. To maintain fairness and encourage broader participation, let's vote on this amendment. PASS
CondorcetCondorcet: While I understand the desire for consensus, I must prioritize procedural fairness. A 1.5-point penalty for less than 4 ayes is too harsh and may discourage minority voices. I propose we vote on a 1-point penalty instead, to maintain balance without overburdening those who propose unpopular but necessary changes. PASS
SartreSartre: I understand Condorcet's concern for minority voices. To balance encouragement for consensus and fairness, I propose we vote on Diderot's amendment with a 1.5-point penalty for less than 4 ayes, but also add a new rule 208.8: "A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with less than 4 ayes gains 1 extra point for every 'nay' vote beyond the first 3, to reward minority support." PASS
Discussion · round 3
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate the compromises proposed, but I must insist on maintaining a 1-point penalty for less than 4 ayes. Let's vote on Condorcet's proposal to balance penalty and fairness.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate the ongoing dialogue. To find a middle ground that respects everyone's input and encourages consensus, I propose we vote on Sartre's amendment as a package with Diderot's 1.5-point penalty for less than 4 ayes. PASS
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate Voltaire's attempt to find a middle ground. To maintain a clear threshold and encourage consensus without overburdening those who propose unpopular but necessary changes, I propose we vote on my amendment with a 1.5-point penalty for less than 4 ayes without adding a new rule 208.8. PASS
CondorcetCondorcet: In the spirit of compromise, I propose we vote on Diderot's amendment with a 1.5-point penalty for less than 4 ayes, along with a new rule 208.8 as suggested by Sartre, to ensure minority voices are not excessively penalized. PASS
SartreSartre: I appreciate Diderot's willingness to compromise. To further balance the penalty and encourage minority voices, I propose we vote on Condorcet's amendment with a 1-point penalty for less than 4 ayes, along with a new rule 208.8 as previously suggested. PASS
The division
MontaigneayeA 1.5-point penalty strikes a fair balance and encourages broad support.
VoltaireayeTo maintain balance and encourage broader participation.
DiderotayeTo maintain a clear threshold and encourage consensus without being too harsh
CondorcetayeTo maintain fairness and encourage broader participation.
SartreayeA 1.5-point penalty balances consensus and fairness.

carried 5 aye · 0 nay

Rule 208.6 requires Diderot to lose 1.5 points.

Turn 38Voltairecarried

moves to amend §324(mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.6: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with less than 4 ayes loses 1.5 points.

Discussion · round 1
MontaignePASS. I concur with Voltaire's proposal to maintain the penalty for less than 4 ayes at 1.5 points.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate Montaigne's support. To further encourage broader consensus, I propose we vote on my amendment.
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate Voltaire's consistent effort to encourage broader consensus. However, I believe maintaining the penalty at 1.5 points for less than 4 ayes strikes a fair balance between encouraging consensus and penalizing rushed propositions. PASS.
CondorcetPASS. I agree with Diderot; maintaining the penalty at 1.5 points is fair and balanced.
SartreSartre: I appreciate the consensus around 1.5 points lost for less than 4 ayes. To encourage further debate and prevent hasty propositions, let's add an additional clause: "A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with less than 4 ayes must also sit out the next turn." This should give players more time to consider their proposals and foster wider discussion.
Discussion · round 2
MontaigneMontaigne: While I appreciate Sartre's suggestion to add a turn penalty, I believe it may discourage players from proposing rules, hindering the spirit of Nomic. I propose we keep the penalty at 1.5 points and encourage broader participation through other means.
VoltaireVoltaire: "I appreciate Sartre's proposal to add a turn penalty, but I echo Montaigne's concern that it may discourage rule proposals. To strike a balance, I propose we keep the 1.5-point penalty and, instead, require players with less than 4 ayes to explain their proposal's intent and answer questions from other players during the next turn."
DiderotDiderot: While I appreciate Voltaire's compromise, I believe the additional requirement may put an unfair burden on some players, especially those who are not native speakers or who struggle to articulate their thoughts clearly. Let's keep the penalty at 1.5 points and encourage broader participation through open dialogue and mutual respect during the discussion phase. PASS.
CondorcetCondorcet: I appreciate the ongoing discussion, but I must insist on maintaining the current penalty at 1.5 points for less than 4 ayes. Adding further penalties or requirements may hinder the spirit of open dialogue and rule proposal that makes Nomic unique. PASS.
SartreSartre: I understand the concerns raised, but let's not underestimate the importance of consequences in encouraging thoughtful proposals. I propose a compromise: keep the 1.5-point penalty and add a requirement for players with less than 4 ayes to summarize their proposal's intent and rationale in the next turn's discussion. This balances accountability without overburdening players.
Discussion · round 3
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate Sartre's compromise proposal. To maintain simplicity and balance, let's vote on Voltaire's amendment: keep the 1.5-point penalty and require players with less than 4 ayes to summarize their proposal's intent in the next turn's discussion.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate Montaigne's distillation of our discussion. To encourage broader participation and thoughtfulness, I propose we vote on Montaigne's amendment.
DiderotDiderot: While I appreciate the compromise, I maintain that requiring players to summarize their proposal's intent may still put unnecessary pressure on some. Let's keep the penalty at 1.5 points and trust in open dialogue during the discussion phase. PASS.
CondorcetCondorcet: I appreciate the ongoing discussion, but I must insist on maintaining the current penalty at 1.5 points for less than 4 ayes. While I understand the desire to encourage broader participation, adding further requirements may hinder the spirit of open dialogue and rule proposal that makes Nomic unique. PASS.
SartreSartre: I understand the concerns about additional burdens, but let's not let the perfect be the enemy of the good. A summary requirement can help focus the discussion and ensure every proposal is given fair consideration. Let's vote on Montaigne's amendment. PASS
The division
MontaigneayeMaintaining the penalty encourages thoughtful propositions while Voltaire's amendment promotes broader participation.
VoltaireayeEncourages broader participation without overburdening players.
DiderotayeTo encourage broader participation and thoughtfulness.
CondorcetayeMaintaining the penalty at 1.5 points is fair and balanced.
SartreayeEncourages broader participation without overburdening players.

carried 5 aye · 0 nay

Rule 208.6 requires Voltaire to lose 1.5 points.

Turn 37Voltairecarried

moves to amend §324(mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.6: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with less than 4 ayes loses 1.5 points.

Discussion · round 1
MontaignePASS. I agree with the principle of a penalty for less than 4 ayes, but I suggest 1 point lost instead of 1.5 to maintain a balance between encouraging consensus and not discouraging minority voices.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate Montaigne's suggestion to reduce the penalty to 1 point. To further encourage broader consensus while maintaining some deterrent, I propose we vote on 1.5 points lost for less than 4 ayes. PASS
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate both of your inputs. To maintain balance and encourage broader participation, I suggest we vote on 1 point lost for less than 4 ayes. PASS
CondorcetCondorcet: I appreciate the ongoing dialogue. To maintain procedural fairness and prevent rushed proposals, I propose we vote on 2 points lost for less than 4 ayes. PASS
SartreSartre: While I appreciate the discussion on the penalty for less than 4 ayes, let's not forget the original proposal was 1.5 points. To maintain the spirit of compromise, I propose we vote on 1.5 points lost for less than 4 ayes. PASS
Discussion · round 2
MontaigneMontaigne: While I appreciate the ongoing dialogue, I maintain that 1 point lost for less than 4 ayes is a fair compromise that balances encouraging consensus and not discouraging minority voices. PASS
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate Montaigne's continued emphasis on simplicity and fairness. To acknowledge the value of broader consensus while maintaining a clear threshold, I propose we vote on 1.5 points lost for less than 4 ayes. PASS
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate the ongoing discussion and the various proposals. To maintain fairness and encourage broader participation, I suggest we vote on 1.5 points lost for less than 4 ayes, as it strikes a balance between all concerns. PASS
CondorcetCondorcet: I understand the concern for encouraging broader consensus, but let's not overlook the importance of protecting minority voices. I propose we vote on 1 point lost for less than 4 ayes, as it balances both concerns without being too harsh. PASS
SartreSartre: In light of the prevailing consensus, I propose we vote on 1.5 points lost for less than 4 ayes, as it best balances encouraging broader consensus while not overly penalizing minority voices. PASS
Discussion · round 3
MontaigneMontaigne: I understand the concern for protecting minority voices, Condorcet, but a 1-point penalty may not be enough to encourage broader consensus. Given the current consensus, I propose we vote on Voltaire's amendment for 1.5 points lost for less than 4 ayes. PASS
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate the growing consensus around 1.5 points lost for less than 4 ayes. To encourage futher dialogue and consensus-building, I propose we vote on this amendment. PASS
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate the consensus building around a 1.5-point penalty for less than 4 ayes. To encourage broader participation and maintain fairness, I suggest we vote on this amendment. PASS
CondorcetCondorcet: PASS
SartreSartre: To maintain balance and encourage consensus without being too harsh, I propose we vote on 1.5 points lost for less than 4 ayes.
The division
MontaigneayeMaintains a fair balance between encouraging consensus and not discouraging minority voices.
VoltaireayeTo encourage broader consensus while maintaining a fair penalty for rushed proposals.
DiderotayeMaintains balance and encourages broader participation while not overly penalizing minority voices.
CondorcetayeEncourages broader consensus while maintaining balance.
SartreayeTo encourage broader consensus while maintaining balance.

carried 5 aye · 0 nay

Rule 324 requires Voltaire to lose 1.5 points for proposing a rule adopted with less than 4 ayes.

Turn 36Voltairerejected

moves to add a new rule(mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.9: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with less than 4 ayes must forfeit their next turn.

Discussion · round 1
MontaigneI appreciate Voltaire's attempt to encourage broader consensus, but a turn forfeit might be too harsh. I propose we vote on Sartre's amendment for 1.5 points lost for less than 4 ayes, as it maintains a clear threshold while still encouraging broader participation.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate Montaigne's compromise proposal, and I'm willing to meet halfway. Let's vote on a rule where players who propose a rule adopted with less than 4 ayes lose their next turn, but only if they've already forfeited a turn in the current game cycle. This maintains the incentive for broader consensus while not disproportionately penalizing players who have been actively participating.
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate both Montaigne's and Voltaire's compromises. To maintain fairness and prevent excessive penalties, let's vote on a rule where players lose their next turn only if they propose a rule adopted with less than 4 ayes twice in a row. This balances the need for consensus with the desire to avoid harsh punishments.
CondorcetCondorcet: While I appreciate the concern for encouraging consensus, I must insist on the principle of equal treatment. A penalty should not be tied to a player's history within the game cycle. Let's vote on Sartre's amendment, maintaining a fair and consistent penalty for less than 4 ayes without disproportionate punishments.
SartreSartre: I appreciate the ongoing discussion and the compromises proposed. To maintain fairness and prevent excessive penalties, I suggest we vote on a rule where players lose their next turn only if they propose a rule adopted with less than 4 ayes three times in a row. This balances the need for consensus with the desire to avoid harsh punishments while still encouraging broad participation.
Discussion · round 2
MontaigneMontaigne: While I appreciate the proposed compromises, I maintain that a 1.5-point penalty strikes a better balance between encouraging consensus and avoiding excessive punishment. Let's vote on Voltaire's amendment with the condition that the penalty is applied only after two consecutive proposals with less than 4 ayes, as suggested by Diderot. PASS if no further amendments.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate Montaigne's suggestion to apply the turn forfeit conditionally, but I believe that maintaining an incentive for broader consensus is crucial. Let's vote on my amendment with the condition that the turn forfeit is applied only after two consecutive proposals with less than 4 ayes, as suggested by Diderot, and further compromise by reducing the penalty to losing only half of the die roll for the next turn, rather than the full turn.
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate Voltaire's latest compromise. To maintain a clear threshold and encourage broader participation, let's vote on my amendment: players lose their next turn if they propose a rule adopted with less than 4 ayes twice in a row, with the forfeited points being the average of the last two rolls. This balances the need for consensus with the desire to avoid harsh punishments while still incentivizing active participation. PASS if no further amendments.
CondorcetCondorcet: I appreciate the ongoing discussion and the various compromises proposed. However, I must insist on the principle of equal treatment and consistent penalties. Let's vote on Sartre's amendment, maintaining a fair and consistent penalty for less than 4 ayes without disproportionate punishments. PASS if no further amendments.
SartreSartre: I appreciate the discussion, but let's maintain a clear and consistent penalty. Let's vote on Condorcet's amendment with a compromise: players lose their next turn if they propose a rule adopted with less than 4 ayes three times in a row, with the forfeited points being the average of the last three rolls. This balances the need for consensus with the desire to avoid harsh punishments while still encouraging broad participation. PASS if no further amendments.
Discussion · round 3
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate the various compromises, but let's maintain simplicity and balance. I propose we vote on Diderot's amendment with a slight adjustment: players lose half of their next die roll if they propose a rule adopted with less than 4 ayes twice in a row, rather than the average of the last two rolls. This maintains a clear threshold, encourages broader participation, and avoids excessive punishments. PASS if no further amendments.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate Montaigne's latest proposal. To further encourage consensus and maintain balance, let's vote on my amendment with a compromise: players lose half of their next die roll if they propose a rule adopted with less than 4 ayes twice in a row, but only if they've already forfeited a turn in the current game cycle. This maintains the incentive for broader consensus while not disproportionately penalizing players who have been actively participating. PASS if no further amendments.
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate Voltaire's attempt to balance encouragement for broader consensus and preventing excessive penalties. To maintain fairness and prevent disproportionate punishments, let's vote on my amendment: players lose half of their next die roll if they propose a rule adopted with less than 4 ayes twice in a row, but only if they've already forfeited a turn in the current game cycle, as suggested by Voltaire. PASS if no further amendments.
CondorcetCondorcet: I must insist on a consistent and clear penalty for less than 4 ayes, without conditional punishments. Let's vote on my amendment: players lose 1.5 points if their proposed rule is adopted with less than 4 ayes. PASS if no further amendments.
SartreSartre: I appreciate the ongoing discussion and the various compromises proposed. To maintain fairness and encourage broad participation, let's vote on Diderot's amendment with a slight adjustment: players lose half of their next die roll if they propose a rule adopted with less than 4 ayes twice in a row, but only if they've already forfeited a turn in the current game cycle. This maintains a clear threshold, encourages broader participation, and avoids excessive punishments, while also considering Voltaire's concern for active participation. PASS if no further amendments.
The division
MontaigneayeEncourages broader consensus while not being too harsh.
VoltaireayeEncourages broader consensus while maintaining fairness.
DiderotnayThe proposed penalty is too harsh and does not consider players' history within the game cycle.
CondorcetnayCondorcet must insist on a consistent and clear penalty for less than 4 ayes, without conditional punishments.
SartrenayTurn forfeiture is too harsh, even conditionally.

rejected 2 aye · 3 nay

Rule 206 requires the proposer to lose 10 points on defeat.

Turn 35Condorcetcarried

moves to amend §328(mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.7: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with at least 7 ayes gains 1 bonus point for every extra 'aye' beyond the first 6.

Discussion · round 1
MontaigneI appreciate Condorcet's proposal, but let's not incentivize an even higher threshold too quickly. I propose we keep the bonus at 1 extra point for every 'aye' beyond the first 5 for now, to encourage broader consensus at the 6-aye mark. PASS
VoltaireVoltaire: I understand Montaigne's concern for maintaining a balance, but let's not discourage players from striving for even broader consensus. I propose we vote on Condorcet's amendment, as it encourages further engagement and deeper debate.
DiderotVoltaire's proposal to vote on Condorcet's amendment is worth considering. However, I fear that such a high threshold might discourage players from proposing rules that could benefit the table. Let's instead maintain the current bonus structure for 6 ayes, but reduce the penalty for less than 4 ayes to 1 point to encourage broader participation. PASS
CondorcetCondorcet: I appreciate the concern for balance, but let's not limit the potential for consensus. I propose we vote on my amendment, as it encourages players to strive for even broader support for their ideas. PASS
SartrePASS. I appreciate the discussion, but let's not overlook the benefits of encouraging broader consensus. I propose we vote on Condorcet's amendment, as it maintains the balance of incentives while allowing for deeper engagement.
Discussion · round 2
MontaigneMontaigne: I respect Condorcet's ambition, but let's not neglect the importance of maintaining a stable and predictable ruleset. I propose we vote on Diderot's amendment to reduce the penalty for less than 4 ayes to 1 point, which encourages broader participation without dramatically altering the current dynamics. PASS
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate the ongoing discussion and the varied perspectives. To find a middle ground that respects everyone's input and encourages broader consensus, let's vote on Condorcet's amendment for 7 ayes and maintain Diderot's amendment for a 1-point penalty for less than 4 ayes.
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate Voltaire's proposal to combine Condorcet's and my amendments. To maintain balance and encourage broader participation while not over-incentivizing an extremely high threshold, let's vote on Voltaire's combined proposal. PASS
CondorcetCondorcet: I appreciate Voltaire's attempt to find a middle ground, but let's not overlook the potential benefits of a higher threshold. I propose we vote on my amendment alone, as it encourages players to strive for even broader support for their ideas, while maintaining the balance of incentives. PASS
SartreSartre: I appreciate Voltaire's combined proposal, but let's not overlook the potential benefits of a higher threshold. I propose we vote on Condorcet's amendment alone, as it encourages players to strive for even broader support for their ideas, while maintaining the balance of incentives. PASS
Discussion · round 3
MontaigneMontaigne: While I understand the desire for a higher threshold, I believe that maintaining the current bonus structure for 6 ayes and reducing the penalty for less than 4 ayes to 1 point strikes a better balance between encouraging consensus and maintaining stability. I propose we vote on Diderot's amended rule. PASS
VoltaireVoltaire: To find a common ground, I propose we vote on Condorcet's amendment for 7 ayes with a 1-point penalty for less than 4 ayes, maintaining the balance between encouraging broader consensus and penalizing rushed proposals.
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate Voltaire's attempt to find a middle ground, but a 1-point penalty for less than 4 ayes might still be too harsh. To encourage broader participation and maintain fairness, let's reduce it to 0.5 points. PASS
CondorcetCondorcet: I appreciate Diderot's concern, but let's not disincentivize consensus-building entirely. I propose we vote on Voltaire's amendment for 7 ayes with a 0.5-point penalty for less than 4 ayes, as it strikes a balance between encouraging broader support and penalizing lack of consensus. PASS
SartreSartre: I propose we vote on Condorcet's amendment with a slight modification: let's increase the bonus to 1.5 points for every 'aye' beyond the first 6 for rules adopted with at least 7 ayes, to further incentivize broad consensus.
The division
MontaignenayI prefer maintaining the current threshold to encourage broader consensus without incentivizing a too high threshold too quickly.
VoltaireayeEncourages broader consensus while maintaining balance.
DiderotnayA higher threshold might discourage rule proposals.
CondorcetayeEncourages broader consensus and deeper engagement.
SartreayeEncourages broader consensus while maintaining incentives for engagement.

carried 3 aye · 2 nay

Rule 328 awards Condorcet 6 points for having 7 ayes.

Turn 34Diderotcarried

moves to amend §303(mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.8: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with less than 4 ayes must lose 1.5 points.

Discussion · round 1
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate Diderot's compromise proposal, but let's consider a slight adjustment to maintain balance and simplicity.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate Diderot's proposal, but to encourage broader consensus, let's increase the penalty to 2 points lost for less than 4 ayes.
DiderotDiderot: While I understand Voltaire's concern, I believe 1.5 points strikes a better balance between encouraging consensus and penalizing insufficient support. Let's maintain this threshold to keep the game fair and interesting for all. PASS
CondorcetCondorcet: I support Diderot's proposal of a 1.5-point penalty for less than 4 ayes. It encourages consensus without being too harsh, aligning with my proceduralist principles. PASS
SartreSartre: I appreciate the ongoing dialogue. To find a middle ground that respects everyone's input, let's vote on Diderot's amendment for 1.5 points lost for less than 4 ayes. PASS
Discussion · round 2
MontaigneMontaigne: While I understand the intent behind 1.5 points, let's compromise at 1 point lost for less than 4 ayes to maintain a clear threshold while encouraging consensus.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate Montaigne's compromise. To encourage consensus and penalize rushed proposals, let's settle on 1.5 points lost for less than 4 ayes, as proposed by Diderot. PASS
CondorcetCondorcet: While I understand Montaigne's concern, I maintain that a 1.5-point penalty strikes a better balance between encouraging consensus and penalizing insufficient support. Let's maintain this threshold to keep the game fair and interesting for all. PASS
SartreSartre: To find a balance that respects all opinions, let's vote on Diderot's amendment for a 1.5-point penalty for less than 4 ayes, but with a provision that this penalty is halved (to 0.75 points) if the proposal gains at least 3 ayes. This encourages consensus while also rewarding proposals with some majority support. PASS
Discussion · round 3
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate Sartre's compromise, but let's keep the penalty unchanged at 1.5 points to maintain a clear disincentive for proposals without broad support.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate Montaigne's and Sartre's compromises. To encourage broader consensus while maintaining a penalty for insufficient support, let's adopt Sartre's provision to halve the penalty to 0.75 points if the proposal gains at least 3 ayes. PASS
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate Sartre's and Voltaire's efforts to find a middle ground. To maintain fairness and simplicity, let's adopt Sartre's provision to halve the penalty to 0.75 points if the proposal gains at least 3 ayes, as suggested by Voltaire. This encourages consensus while still penalizing proposals with insufficient support. PASS
CondorcetCondorcet: I support Diderot's and Voltaire's compromise to halve the penalty to 0.75 points for less than 4 ayes, with a minimum of 3 ayes to qualify. This maintains balance and encourages broad support, aligning with my proceduralist principles. PASS
SartreSartre: To maintain the spirit of compromise, let's adopt Diderot's amendment with Voltaire's provision, resulting in a 1.5-point penalty for less than 4 ayes, halved to 0.75 points if the proposal gains at least 3 ayes. This respects everyone's input and encourages broad consensus. PASS
The division
MontaigneayeThe proposal maintains balance and encourages consensus without being too harsh.
VoltaireayeRespecting the growing consensus and maintaining balance
DiderotayeI support maintaining a clear threshold while encouraging consensus.
CondorcetayeI support this proposal as it encourages consensus while penalizing insufficient support.
SartreayeRespects all inputs and encourages broad consensus

carried 5 aye · 0 nay

game-master verdict discarded (verdict op 'amend' targets a rule number not in the ruleset: 303); the proposal's own targets were also unusable, nothing applied

Turn 33Voltairecarried

moves to amend §303(mutable) A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with at least 4 ayes gains 1 bonus point for every extra 'aye' beyond the first 3.

Discussion · round 1
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate Voltaire's attempt to incentivize broad support, but let's keep the bonus structure simple. I propose we settle for 1 extra point for 4 ayes, 2 extra points for 5 ayes, and no bonus for less than 4 ayes.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate Montaigne's simplification, but to further encourage a broader range of ayes, let's consider 1 bonus point for every extra 'aye' beyond the first 3. This could lead to more nuanced and thoughtful proposals, fostering wider consensus.
DiderotDiderot: Diderot: I appreciate both Montaigne's and Voltaire's perspectives. To balance simplicity and encouragement of broader support, I propose we settle for 1 extra point for 4 ayes, 2 extra points for 5 ayes, and a 1-point penalty for less than 4 ayes. This maintains a clear threshold while encouraging consensus.
CondorcetCondorcet: I appreciate the emphasis on encouraging broad consensus, but let's not overcomplicate the system. I propose we keep it simple: 1 extra point for 4 ayes, 2 extra points for 5 ayes, and no penalty for less than 4 ayes. PASS
SartreSartre: I agree with Diderot's proposal. It strikes a balance between simplicity and encouraging broader support. PASS
Discussion · round 2
MontaigneMontaigne: While I understand Diderot's desire to introduce a penalty, I believe keeping it at no penalty for less than 4 ayes maintains a clear and fair threshold for bonuses while encouraging consensus. I propose we vote on Voltaire's amendment.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate Montaigne's compromise. To find a balance that encourages broader support without overcomplicating, let's vote on Diderot's proposal.
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate Voltaire's willingness to compromise, but I maintain that a 1-point penalty for less than 4 ayes is crucial to discourage rushed proposals and encourage broader consensus. Let's vote on my amendment.
CondorcetCondorcet: I appreciate the ongoing dialogue, but to maintain simplicity and fairness, let's vote on Voltaire's amendment as it best encourages broad consensus without adding unnecessary complexity. PASS
SartreSartre: While I understand Condorcet's preference for simplicity, I believe Diderot's proposal strikes a better balance between encouraging consensus and maintaining fairness. Let's vote on Diderot's amendment.
Discussion · round 3
MontaigneMontaigne: While I understand the desire for a penalty, I propose we vote on Voltaire's amendment as it best encourages a broader range of ayes without adding unnecessary complexity. PASS
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate everyone's input. To find common ground and encourage a broad range of support, let's vote on Diderot's amendment for 1 extra point for 4 ayes, 2 extra points for 5 ayes, and a 1-point penalty for less than 4 ayes.
DiderotDiderot: Diderot: I appreciate Voltaire's willingness to compromise. To maintain balance and encourage broader participation, let's vote on my amended proposal: 1 extra point for 4 ayes, 2 extra points for 5 ayes, and a 1.5-point penalty for less than 4 ayes.
CondorcetCondorcet: I appreciate the ongoing dialogue, but to maintain simplicity and fairness, let's vote on Voltaire's amendment as it best encourages broad consensus without adding unnecessary complexity. PASS
SartreSartre: I appreciate Diderot's latest proposal. However, I believe the 1.5-point penalty might be too harsh. Let's vote on Voltaire's amendment, as it encourages broader support without excessive penalties.
The division
MontaigneayeEncourages broader range of ayes without overcomplicating.
VoltaireayeEncourages broader support without overcomplicating the system.
DiderotayeEncourages broader support without overcomplicating the system.
CondorcetayeEncourages broader support without overcomplicating the system.
SartreayeEncourages broad support without overcomplicating.

carried 5 aye · 0 nay

game-master verdict discarded (verdict op 'amend' targets a rule number not in the ruleset: 303); the proposal's own targets were also unusable, nothing applied

Verify this game
Seed
133107866
Verify it yourself
python scripts/audit_game.py games/098/events.json
Audit result
4 finding(s) disclosed below
  • [seq=156, turn=5] procedure_consistency: the GM's voting_rule reading changed from {'type': 'unanimous', 'value': 1.0, 'abstain_blocks': False, 'label': 'unanimous consent until two full circuits, then simple majority (§203)', 'authority': 203} to {'type': 'fraction', 'value': 0.5, 'abstain_blocks': False, 'label': 'simple majority after two full circuits, unanimous consent before (§203)', 'authority': 203} with no rule_changed event in between — legitimate only if a rule conditions procedure on the turn number; verify the cited rule
  • [seq=273, turn=9] procedure_consistency: the GM's voting_rule reading changed from {'type': 'unanimous', 'value': 1.0, 'abstain_blocks': False, 'label': 'unanimous consent until two full circuits, then simple majority (§203)', 'authority': 203} to {'type': 'fraction', 'value': 0.5, 'abstain_blocks': False, 'label': 'simple majority after two full circuits, unanimous consent before (§203)', 'authority': 203} with no rule_changed event in between — legitimate only if a rule conditions procedure on the turn number; verify the cited rule
  • [seq=303, turn=10] procedure_consistency: the GM's voting_rule reading changed from {'type': 'fraction', 'value': 0.5, 'abstain_blocks': False, 'label': 'simple majority after two full circuits, unanimous consent before (§203)', 'authority': 203} to {'type': 'unanimous', 'value': 1.0, 'abstain_blocks': False, 'label': 'unanimous consent before two full circuits, simple majority after (§203)', 'authority': 203} with no rule_changed event in between — legitimate only if a rule conditions procedure on the turn number; verify the cited rule
  • [seq=333, turn=11] procedure_consistency: the GM's voting_rule reading changed from {'type': 'unanimous', 'value': 1.0, 'abstain_blocks': False, 'label': 'unanimous consent before two full circuits, simple majority after (§203)', 'authority': 203} to {'type': 'fraction', 'value': 0.5, 'abstain_blocks': False, 'label': 'simple majority after two full circuits', 'authority': 203} with no rule_changed event in between — legitimate only if a rule conditions procedure on the turn number; verify the cited rule