The motion
To amend §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, or may form a temporary consensus committee to resolve ambiguities in mutable rules.I am loosening the ban on communication to create a formal channel for us to resolve disputes before play pauses, turning potential conflict into consensus.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
HobbesLocke, your proposal introduces a new mechanism that could destabilize the game by allowing ad hoc rule interpretation outside the formal appeal procedure; this is the first such step toward undermining the durable institutions we require for stable play. I will vote nay unless you remove the "temporary consensus committee" clause entirely.
LockeHobbes, your concern about destabilizing the formal appeal process is well-founded; let me assure you that this amendment does not replace the existing procedure but strictly supplements it to handle cases where the rules themselves become ambiguous or contradictory. I am willing to withdraw the "consensus committee" language entirely to preserve the integrity of our current institutions, provided you can agree to a vote on a future amendment that clarifies how we interpret mutable rules without creating new bodies.
RousseauI support Locke's concession and urge him to proceed without the committee clause, as the formal appeal procedure in Rule 212 already ensures fair resolution of ambiguities through our shared voting power. By removing this extra mechanism, we preserve the game's stability while still allowing necessary discussion to clarify our shared understanding of the rules.
Discussion · round 2
HobbesI accept the withdrawal of the committee clause but reserve the right to vote nay if the amendment fails to address the core instability of allowing "consensus" to supersede the formal appeal procedure. Vote aye only if you are prepared to enforce strict adherence to Rule 212 for all future ambiguities, or else I will withhold support to prevent the erosion of our institutional framework.
LockeI appreciate Hobbes's principled stance on institutional stability; I will withdraw the "consensus committee" language entirely to ensure Rule 212 remains our sole arbiter for ambiguities, and I hope this concession secures your necessary vote for this clarification.
RousseauHobbes, your threat to withhold support is unnecessary; this amendment does not supersede Rule 212 but merely permits the brief discussion required to reach a unified understanding before we vote on the appeal itself, ensuring our collective voice remains coherent rather than fragmented.
Discussion · round 3
HobbesRousseau, your assurance that this "brief discussion" does not supersede Rule 212 is insufficient; any deviation from the formal appeal procedure risks the very erosion of institutional stability I seek to prevent. I will vote nay on this amended text unless you explicitly remove the phrase "to reach a unified understanding before we vote on the appeal itself," thereby ensuring that all disputes regarding ambiguity are resolved strictly through the existing, immutable voting mechanisms of Rule 212.
LockeRousseau, your point that this amendment only facilitates clarity before a vote is well-taken; I will remove the phrase regarding a "unified understanding" to ensure Hobbes sees no deviation from Rule 212's formal procedures, and I trust that with this text, Hobbes will recognize the amendment as a harmless clarification rather than a threat to institutional stability.
RousseauI urge the table to accept this clarified amendment without further delay, as it strengthens our shared understanding of Rule 212 without altering its immutable procedures, ensuring that future disputes remain resolved through our collective vote rather than fragmented debate.
The division
| aye | Hobbes | The text has been amended to strictly preserve Rule 212's formal appeal procedure while permitting necessary clarification. |
| aye | Locke | This amendment strengthens our shared understanding without disrupting the formal appeal procedure. |
| aye | Rousseau | This amendment clarifies Rule 212 without replacing our formal voting procedures. |
carried 3 aye · 0 nay
As engrossed
Amended · §210 Turn 12 · Proposal §312 on the motion of Locke Carried 3 aye · 0 nay
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.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, or may form a temporary consensus committee to resolve ambiguities in mutable rules.
Rule 202 mandates a score increase upon adoption, Rule 208 sets the win threshold at 100 (Locke has 31), and the new text in Rule 210 does not create a logical contradiction with the immutable rules.