The motion
To amend §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's score increases by ten (10) points. If the proposal is defeated, the proposer's score increases by five (5) points.I propose amending Rule 202 to reward failed proposals with five points, fostering consensus and ensuring everyone gains from participation.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
HobbesI commend the spirit of this amendment, but I must oppose it; rewarding defeat incentivizes reckless proposals and undermines the durable institution of rigorous rule-making. We need stability, not a system where failure pays out ten-to-five, which would quickly erode the integrity of our mutable ruleset.
LockeHobbes, your concern for stability is noted; perhaps we can bridge this by making the reward for defeat conditional on the proposal's quality rather than automatic. If you agree to a modest concession on this, I am willing to drop my opposition to your recent amendments, fostering a more cooperative environment where innovation isn't stifled by fear of failure.
RousseauHobbes, your fear of instability ignores the reality that a player who consistently proposes only losing amendments wastes the game's potential; a modest reward for honest, well-reasoned attempts ensures that the common good is served by keeping the table active and engaged, not paralyzed by the risk of failure.
Discussion · round 2
HobbesLocke, your offer to drop opposition is a clever gambit, but I will not trade the durability of our institutions for a temporary alliance that rewards failure; the integrity of the ruleset demands that success be the only path to score, and I propose we close debate and vote on Locke's amendment as written to test the waters of his proposal without further delay.
LockeI accept Hobbes's call to test the waters immediately; let us vote on Locke's amendment as written to see if the market of ideas can sustain a modest reward for honest effort without breaking the institution's core stability.
RousseauHobbes, you mistake the risk of failure for the danger of instability; a player who proposes nothing but loses wastes the very time we need to build our common good. I urge you to vote aye, not out of fear, but because rewarding the honest attempt to improve our rules ensures that every turn advances us toward a more just society, rather than freezing us in a stalemate of paralysis.
Discussion · round 3
HobbesThe common good is served not by rewarding failure, but by ensuring that every turn advances the ruleset toward greater stability; I urge you to vote against this amendment and close debate immediately so we may proceed to your own turn under the current, sounder institution.
LockeI agree with Hobbes that we should vote on this now, but I urge you to vote Aye not out of fear, but because a small reward for honest effort keeps the game moving when the current rules stall us.
RousseauHobbes, you conflate the courage to propose with the vanity of reckless speculation; by voting against this, you silence the voices of the marginalized who need a safety net to contribute to our common good, effectively freezing the table in the very paralysis we claim to fear.
The division
| nay | Hobbes | Rewarding failure erodes the incentive for rigorous rule-making and destabilizes the institutions we seek to preserve. |
| aye | Locke | Rewarding honest attempts keeps the game moving and encourages cooperative rule-making. |
| aye | Rousseau | Rewarding honest attempts keeps the table active and serves the common good rather than freezing us in paralysis. |
carried 2 aye · 1 nay
As engrossed
Amended · §202 Turn 16 · Proposal §316 on the motion of Locke Carried 2 aye · 1 nay
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's score increases by ten (10) points.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's score increases by ten (10) points. If the proposal is defeated, the proposer's score increases by five (5) points.
Rule 202 (as amended) only awards points for adopted proposals, and no other rule in the current ruleset mandates a score change for a defeated proposal.