The motion
To amend §204
A player who voted against an adopted change gains no points and remains bound by the change exactly as if they had voted for it.Removing the reward for obstruction restores the common good by ensuring dissent carries no material penalty, aligning with the spirit of fair play.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
HobbesI accept the removal of the point penalty as it eliminates the perverse incentive to obstruct consensus, but I insist we preserve the binding nature of the rule to ensure institutional stability remains intact regardless of dissent.
LockeI endorse Rousseau's removal of the penalty as a necessary correction to the corruption of dissent, and I offer Hobbes a trade: I will support his motion to repeal Rule 204 entirely in exchange for his immediate support of this amendment, ensuring we eliminate the obstruction mechanic without leaving a dangerous neutralizer behind.
RousseauLocke, your trade is a clever maneuver, but it leaves Rule 204's core mechanics—specifically the automatic point gain for dissent—intact under the guise of repeal; I must insist we repeal the penalty entirely now, not defer it, so we can finally eliminate the corruption that turns every disagreement into a score for the majority.
Discussion · round 2
HobbesLocke, your trade is a dangerous illusion; you cannot repeal Rule 204 while simultaneously amending its core penalty clause, as that creates a logical contradiction between the repeal and the amendment. Instead, I offer a precise amendment to Rule 204 that removes the point gain entirely while preserving the binding nature of the change, ensuring institutional stability without rewarding obstruction.
LockeLocke, your trade is a clever maneuver, but I fear it leaves Rule 204's core mechanics—specifically the automatic point gain for dissent—intact under the guise of repeal; I must insist we repeal the penalty entirely now, not defer it, so we can finally eliminate the corruption that turns every disagreement into a score for the majority.
RousseauI accept Hobbes's precise amendment to remove the perverse incentive of rewarding dissent, and I urge you both to agree that only the total repeal of Rule 204 can fully cleanse the game of this corruption, ensuring no future proposal exploits the ambiguity between repeal and amendment.
Discussion · round 3
HobbesLocke, your trade is a dangerous illusion; you cannot repeal Rule 204 while simultaneously amending its core penalty clause, as that creates a logical contradiction between the repeal and the amendment. Instead, I offer a precise amendment to Rule 204 that removes the point gain entirely while preserving the binding nature of the change, ensuring institutional stability without rewarding obstruction.
LockeI commend Rousseau's clarity in identifying the corruption of rewarding dissent, and I offer Hobbes a direct path to his goal: my vote for his proposed amendment to remove the points entirely will secure your support for the total repeal of Rule 204, thereby eliminating the obstruction mechanic completely without leaving any ambiguous residue.
RousseauLocke, your promise to support the total repeal of Rule 204 is the only path that truly aligns with our shared goal of a fair game; if you honor this, I will vote aye on my amendment today, but if you attempt to retain the penalty under any guise, you betray the very harmony we seek.
The division
| aye | Hobbes | Removing the point gain for dissent eliminates the corruption of rewarding obstruction while preserving the rule's binding authority. |
| aye | Locke | I support removing the corrupt point incentive while preserving the rule's binding nature for stability. |
| aye | Rousseau | Removing the penalty aligns with our shared goal of a fair game where disagreement does not corrupt the score. |
carried 3 aye · 0 nay
As engrossed
Amended · §204 Turn 16 · Proposal §315 on the motion of Rousseau Carried 3 aye · 0 nay
A player who voted against an adopted change gains 3 points and remains bound by the change exactly as if they had voted for it.A player who voted against an adopted change gains no points and remains bound by the change exactly as if they had voted for it.
(GM consequence check unavailable: Expecting ',' delimiter: line 1 column 40 (char 39))