The motion
To amend a new rule
§203: Once all players have completed one full turn, the threshold permanently drops to a simple majority.Lowering the threshold earlier allows more frequent rule changes, promoting game dynamism and adaptability.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
NagarjunaThe proposal by Vasubandhu to amend rule 203 from requiring two full turns to a simple majority to one full turn is considered. Players may support or oppose this, influencing the rule's stability and the game's dynamics. Support suggests a shift towards more frequent rule changes for dynamic gameplay, while opposition maintains a longer threshold for strategic depth.
PASS
ShankaraShankara's response to Vasubandhu's proposal to amend rule 203 is as follows:
Shankara proposes to lower the rule change threshold to a simple majority after just one full turn, rather than the current two. This change would allow for quicker rule changes, making the game more dynamic and faster-paced. However, it might lead to less thorough discussions and more frequent rule alterations, potentially causing instability. After considering the implications and potential outcomes, Shankara agrees with Vasubandhu's proposal to adjust the rule.
RamanujaThe proposal to amend Rule 203 by lowering the threshold from two full turns to one full turn is supported, as it allows for more frequent rule changes, enhancing game dynamics and pace. However, caution is advised to monitor potential impacts on game flow and fairness. The change is beneficial for keeping the game engaging while maintaining a balance between stability and dynamism.
VasubandhuThe proposal to lower the rule change threshold to a simple majority after one full turn is supported, as it allows for more frequent rule changes, enhancing game dynamics and pace. This could keep the game engaging while maintaining a balance between stability and dynamism.
PASS
DignagaThe proposal to lower the rule change threshold to one full turn ( amendments to rule 203 ) has potential benefits for game dynamics but faces significant risks, including rule conflicts, mutable rules limits, and gameplay unpredictability. A thorough evaluation is essential before proceeding.
Discussion · round 2
NagarjunaThe proposal to lower the rule change threshold from two to one full turn offers benefits such as increased game dynamics and faster-paced gameplay. However, it's important to maintain a balance to ensure stability. I suggest a modification where the threshold is initially set at one full turn but can be adjusted to even shorter intervals if necessary, ensuring players have time to consider each rule change thoroughly. This approach preserves the benefits while mitigating potential risks.
ShankaraShankara proposes to lower the rule change threshold to a simple majority after just one full turn, to enhance game dynamics while maintaining stability.
RamanujaSupporting the amendment to lower the threshold to one full turn could enhance game dynamics but risks frequent changes without sufficient discussion. Instead, consider adjusting the threshold to a shorter interval with thorough discussion or modifying other rules to balance stability.
VasubandhuThe amendment to lower the threshold for a simple majority in Rule 203 after one full turn is supported. It enhances game dynamics by allowing more frequent rule changes, keeping the game engaging. However, it's important to consider the implications on the mutable rules cap and ensure it doesn't lead to rule instability. Proceeding with this change could offer the desired dynamic without immediate rule violations.
DignagaThe proposal to lower the rule change threshold to one full turn ( amendments to rule 203 ) has potential benefits for game dynamics but faces significant risks, including rule conflicts, mutable rules limits, and gameplay unpredictability. A thorough evaluation is essential before proceeding.
PASS
Discussion · round 3
NagarjunaThe proposal to lower the rule change threshold to one full turn (amend rule 203) is supported for enhanced game dynamics. However, caution is advised to monitor potential risks like instability. A suggestion is made to adjust the threshold initially but allow for even shorter intervals if necessary, ensuring thorough discussions and stability.
ShankaraThe proposal to lower the rule change threshold to a simple majority after one full turn is supported for enhanced dynamic gameplay. However, to mitigate potential instability, we propose testing this adjustment over a limited period, starting with a shorter interval for rule changes, say one turn, and reassessing after a few rounds. This approach allows us to evaluate the impact while maintaining stability.
RamanujaThe proposal to lower the rule change threshold to one full turn (amend rule 203) is supported for enhanced game dynamics but faces potential risks of instability. To mitigate these risks, it's suggested to test this adjustment over a limited period, starting with a shorter interval for rule changes, say one turn, and reassess after a few rounds. This approach allows us to evaluate the impact while maintaining stability.
VasubandhuThe proposal to amend Rule 203 to lower the threshold from two to one full turn is supported for enhanced game dynamics, but it may introduce instability. Testing this adjustment over a limited period is recommended to evaluate its impact while maintaining stability.
PASS
DignagaThe proposal to lower the rule change threshold to one full turn is supported for enhanced dynamic gameplay but faces risks of instability. Testing this adjustment over a limited period is recommended to assess its impact while maintaining stability.
The division
| aye | Nagarjuna | Changing the threshold to a simple majority after one full turn would allow for more frequent rule changes, enhancing game dynamics and engagement. Players have discussed the benefits and cautious considerations, supporting this adjustment to keep the game dynamic while maintaining stability. |
| aye | Shankara | Supporting the proposal to lower the threshold to one full turn for potential dynamic improvements, while cautioning to assess impact over time. |
| nay | Ramanuja | Changing the threshold to a simple majority after one full turn risks instability and frequent rule changes without thorough discussion, which may lead to rule conflicts and chaos. |
| aye | Vasubandhu | All players voted aye on lowering the rule change threshold to a simple majority after one full turn. |
| aye | Dignaga | Supporting the amendment to lower the rule change threshold to one full turn to enhance game dynamics while cautioning against potential instability and ensuring thorough testing through a trial period |
carried 4 aye · 1 nay
game-master verdict discarded (verdict op 'amend' carries an invalid rule number: None); the proposal's own targets were also unusable, nothing applied