The motion
To amend §204
A rule change may be adopted without every voter's assent once the threshold has shifted to a simple majority (rule 203); a player who voted against an adopted change gains 8 points, and a player who proposed an adopted change gains 8 points.This amendment creates a more equitable distribution of points, rewarding both successful legislation and principled dissent.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
HobbesMontesquieu, your proposal to award points for mere proposal rather than adoption incentivizes frivolous rule-hopping and destabilizes the game's core mechanics. Let us preserve the distinction between the cost of failure and the reward of success to maintain durable institutions.
MontesquieuHobbes, your concern for stability is admirable, but my proposal aims to balance the reward for successful legislation with the incentive for active participation, preventing a system where only one path to points exists. Rousseau, I believe this modification offers a just compensation for both successful legislation and principled dissent.
RousseauMontesquieu, your proposal reduces the game to a mere lottery of dice rolls rather than a struggle for the common good; if we reward the act of proposing over the merit of the rule itself, we incentivize frivolous obstruction and destroy the very deliberation we claim to cherish.
Discussion · round 2
HobbesMontesquieu, rewarding mere proposal over adoption invites the very frivolous rule-hopping we must avoid; let us preserve the essential distinction between the cost of failure and the reward of success to maintain durable institutions.
MontesquieuHobbes, your concerns for stability are well-founded, but Rousseau, my proposal acknowledges the value of participation beyond mere dissent; it seeks to ensure that proposing beneficial legislation is also justly rewarded, fostering a more balanced and active legislative environment.
RousseauMontesquieu, your proposal collapses the distinction between the duty to legislate and the right to dissent, turning every turn into a mere lottery of dice rolls rather than a calculated struggle for the common good; let us preserve the essential asymmetry where points are earned only for successful laws that bind us all.
Discussion · round 3
HobbesI urge you to reject this amendment, Montesquieu, as it blunts the necessary penalty for legislative failure and turns our turns into a lottery of dice rolls rather than a calculated struggle for durable institutions; let us preserve the sharp distinction between the cost of defeat and the reward of success so that only prudent, binding laws govern our game.
MontesquieuRousseau, your point on the distinction between legislative duty and dissent is insightful; however, I believe rewarding successful proposals at 8 points, rather than a die roll, fosters a more predictable and equitable path to progress, benefiting all players.
RousseauMontesquieu, your proposal collapses the essential distinction between the calculated struggle for the common good and the mere lottery of dice, incentivizing frivolous obstruction under the guise of participation; let us preserve the sharp asymmetry where points are earned only for successful laws that truly bind us all.
The division
| nay | Hobbes | Rewarding mere proposal incentivizes frivolous rule-hopping that undermines the durable institutions we require. |
| aye | Montesquieu | This amendment fosters a balanced legislative environment by rewarding both successful proposals and principled dissent with a predictable 8 points. |
| nay | Rousseau | Rewarding the mere act of proposing over the merit of a successful law turns our turns into a lottery rather than a struggle for the common good. |
rejected 1 aye · 2 nay
Rule 206 mandates that the proposer loses 10 points and the turn ends upon defeat, while no rule awards points to dissenters when a proposal fails.