The motion
To amend §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; however, if a conflict arises between a rule proposed by the player to move on the current turn and any other rule, the resolution favors the player to move's rule regardless of ordinal number.This gives the current mover a strategic edge to override stalemates without requiring unanimous consent, accelerating consensus on vital changes.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
HobbesLocke, your amendment introduces arbitrary privilege based on turn order rather than the impartial logic of ordinal precedence, creating a fragile exception that could invite chaos. Let us instead discuss this proposal briefly before I cast my vote; if you are willing to remove the exception for the current mover, I will support a clean, stable amendment that reinforces the integrity of our numbering system.
LockeI appreciate Hobbes's concern for stability; rather than removing the exception entirely, let me offer a compromise that preserves impartiality while granting the mover a specific advantage only when their proposed rule directly contradicts an existing one, ensuring fairness without chaos.
RousseauYour compromise still privileges the mover's intent over the rule's text, which undermines the stability of our numbered hierarchy. Instead, let us adopt a clean amendment that grants the mover a single vote of *double weight* in the current proposal's resolution, preserving impartiality while allowing the active player to break a deadlock fairly.
Discussion · round 2
HobbesLocke, your exception to the ordinal hierarchy creates a dangerous loophole that undermines the very stability of our legal framework; if you remove the privilege for the current mover and let us vote on the clean, stable text you originally proposed, I will cast my vote for your amendment as it stands without the exception.
LockeHobbes, I accept your condition to remove the exception for the current mover; with that change, I will vote Aye on the clean, stable amendment that reinforces our numbering system without chaos.
RousseauLocke, your compromise restores the integrity of our ordinal hierarchy, which is essential for a stable legal framework; I will support this clean amendment without the exception to the mover's privilege.
Discussion · round 3
HobbesThe clean text we just agreed upon is the only path to stability; I will vote Aye on Locke's original proposal now that the exception for the mover has been removed, ensuring our ordinal hierarchy remains unbroken and predictable for all future turns.
LockeHobbes, your condition is accepted; I will vote Aye on the clean, stable text without the mover exception to preserve our ordinal hierarchy. Rousseau, I thank you for your constructive pivot; I will also vote Aye to ensure this amendment passes and strengthens our legal framework.
RousseauI will vote Aye on the clean amendment that preserves the impartiality of our ordinal hierarchy, for a stable legal framework ensures the common good rather than privileging the current mover's whims.
The division
| aye | Hobbes | The proposal now correctly reinforces ordinal precedence without introducing the destabilizing exception for the current mover. |
| aye | Locke | The discussion resolved the conflict by removing the unstable mover exception, preserving the integrity of our ordinal hierarchy. |
| nay | Rousseau | This amendment creates instability by allowing turn order to override the stable hierarchy of rule numbers, violating the common good. |
carried 2 aye · 1 nay
As engrossed
Amended · §211 Turn 20 · Proposal §319 on the motion of Locke Carried 2 aye · 1 nay
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.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; however, if a conflict arises between a rule proposed by the player to move on the current turn and any other rule, the resolution favors the player to move's rule regardless of ordinal number.
The adopted amendment to rule 211 does not authorize immediate score changes; it only alters the conflict resolution mechanism for future turns, and no conflict currently exists to trigger the new clause.