Talk:317
From Nomicapolis
Contents |
Proposer's summary and declarations
This is to fix the use of the word turn and the fact that the Judge has been abolished.
I'll tell you right now that I'm not going to change consensus, since we're trying to obtain a consensus on ever rule that we pass anyway. And for some reason I don't think anyone really doesn't "know" what the term consensus means and all the debate is "well some yahoo might come along and abuse it." If you think rule 212 as it stands is better then how I've rewritten it then vote it down, but don't vote it down because you're going to argue obsure difinitions. The bottom line is: If the rules are changed so that further play is impossible, or if the legality of a move cannot be determined with finality, or if by (a general agreement or majority of opinion i.e.)consensus not overruled, a move appears equally legal and illegal, then the player with the most points is the winner.
So taken in context the word consensus doesn't pose any of the questionable content that is really being debated. I mean the word Quorum isn't defined in the ruleset and only got one line of debate with no retort. So does anyone disagress that we don't want a general agreement and or majority of opinion to decide if a rule change is both legal and illegal?
And for the record nobody was even arguing the fact that I left the word move in, when we no longer have move defined in the ruleset. I did change that to rule proposal. So can I just ask that we concentrate on the big picture?
Debate
- I am uncomfortable with the term consensus since it is not officially defined in the ruleset. Would it be equivalent to unaminous consent as defined in rule 310? I am concerned that some yahoo might try to dissent in order to deadlock the game. Perhaps a supermajority would suffice, or an even more restrictive 9/10ths overwhelming majority. I might just be paranoid though. --Simulacrum 03:27, 15 November 2006 (EST)
- {con‧sen‧sus –noun, plural -sus‧es. 1. majority of opinion: The consensus of the group was that they should meet twice a month. 2. general agreement or concord; harmony.} I choose this wording since in its current form rule 306 part two says, with more words, you need a concensus to deem a proposed rule invalid. --Dayd 10:16, 15 November 2006 (EST)
- I agree with Sim - "Consensus" is kind of a wishy-washy word. "Majority of opinion" is the Dictionary.com primary meaning, but it also lists "general agreement or concord; harmony" as a secondary definition. Along with their house definition, Dictionary.com lists definitions from the American Heritage Dictionary and from WordNet.com, the former: "An opinion or position reached by a group as a whole," and the latter: "agreement in the judgment or opinion reached by a group as a whole." All of these definitions (other than the Dictionary.com primary definition) seem to indicate a kind of inexact unanimity rather than a simple majority. To my way of thinking, "consensus" is kind of "this is what the group agreed on," not an exact measure like plurality, majority, supermajority, or unanimity. I would prefer a more exact wording in the rule. Applejuicefool 16:43, 15 November 2006 (EST)
- 306 never uses the word "consensus" nor does it imply consensus is necessary to declare a proposal invalid. It basically states that an accusation of invalidity has to be voted on, with the same voting rules as rule change proposals. Applejuicefool 16:48, 15 November 2006 (EST)
- Can't we just change "concensus" to "overwhelming majority"? --Shivan 17:27, 16 November 2006 (EST)
- Still inexact! What is "overwhelming?" 90%? 75%? 55%? What? Applejuicefool 19:48, 16 November 2006 (EST)
- I'm sorry, but you're just wrong. You have presented 1 definition that says "consensus" means "majority." I have presented 3 that indicate it means unanimity. Hypothetical: We get Nomicapolis up to 20 players. 19 agree on an issue. One strenuously and vocally objects. Do you have consensus? What if 2 object? What percentage have to disagree to spoil consensus? Here's the "consensus" entry from Thesaurus.com:
- Main Entry: consensus
- Part of Speech: noun
- Definition: agreement
- Synonyms: accord, concord, concurrence, consent, harmony, unanimity, unison, unity
- Antonyms: disagreement, discord, dissension
- Notes: a census is an official, periodic, count of the population; a consensus is an agreement in the judgment or opinion reached by a group as a whole
- Source: Roget's New Millennium™ Thesaurus, First Edition (v 1.3.1)
- Copyright © 2006 by Lexico Publishing Group, LLC. All rights reserved.
The problem is, if this situation ever comes up, the majority will argue that a majority constitutes "consensus", while the minority will argue that "consensus" means unanimity (which it does). Please feel free to explain your reasoning - what is the logic behind NOT using a more precise word? Applejuicefool 22:28, 16 November 2006 (EST)
- Incidentally, I don't think 212 is better than 317, but I will vote agains 317 as written because it creates as many problems as it solves. It's a lateral move, not an improvement. Applejuicefool 22:32, 16 November 2006 (EST)
- I understand that the proposer is unwilling to change the word in question. I also understad that the use of the word, as is, is possibly problematic to the future of this game to some of the players. I would suggest a compromise: leave the word but define it as well, either by using one of the definitions provided by 310 or by creating a brand new definition such as 50% of eligible voters + 1; or unaminous consent - 1; or somewhere in-between such as 87% or whatever you feel is right. That's the only reason why the rule that mentions quorum passed, because the rule defined the term.
- As it is, I am still on the fence, I do like this proposal but my position would definately improve if we see some sort of compromise. Lastly, I would like to mention that the proposer did catch me red-handed as I did not notice the word "turn" in the proposal. I thank the proposer for the change of words in that regard. --Simulacrum 02:29, 17 November 2006 (EST)
I think we should ammend rule 310 and create the "supermajority". It should defined as be 8/10 or 9/10 of the votes cast.
The word concensus is problematic because we are getting stuck in semantics. Where is come from concensus actally means 100% of the votes. So even if one person says no the proposal/whatever is not passed.
Vote
For
Against
~
