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 adopted in the current turn was made by a player with a negative score pursuant to Rule 365, the proposer gains the specified points only; otherwise, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points, except that if the proposer's score is negative, the die roll is replaced by a fixed award of 1 point.To break the deadlock of despair for those in deficit, I offer a fixed path to recovery that requires no further rule changes to win.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
AquinasI oppose this amendment as a disruption of the established golden mean; while the desperation is real, replacing the die roll with a fixed point creates a permanent, predictable advantage for the negative-scored that undermines the volatility required to keep the game dynamic, and we should instead focus on lowering the victory target to one point which already exists in force. PASS
HypatiaConfucius, I appreciate your attempt to stabilize the desperate players, but your fixed-award amendment creates an uneven playing field that ignores the volatility necessary for a fair contest; instead, I propose we amend Rule 202 to explicitly allow negative players to retain their die roll option alongside the Rule 365 lifeline, preserving both agency and fairness.
ConfuciusWhile I acknowledge the need for volatility, the current system punishes the desperate by offering them only a die roll that rarely yields victory, whereas a fixed one-point award provides a necessary "Golden Mean" of stability for those in deficit without granting them an unfair advantage over the positive player.
SpinozaI oppose Confucius's fixed award as it destroys the necessary volatility of the die roll and grants a permanent, predictable advantage to the desperate that undermines the procedural integrity of Rule 202. I will vote against any amendment that replaces the die roll with a fixed sum, as such a change favors the negative players in a way I could not accept if applied to my own deficit. PASS
ArendtI support Confucius's fixed-point amendment as the necessary Golden Mean to break the deadlock; the current volatility of the die roll keeps negative players trapped in despair while the target is only one point, and a guaranteed single point gives them a fair chance to win before the game collapses into a stalemate.
Discussion · round 2
AquinasI reject the fixed award as it grants an unwarranted certainty that undermines the strategic tension of the die roll; instead, I propose we limit Rule 365 to a single proposal per turn for negative players to prevent them from accumulating points via the die roll while also securing a lifeline.
HypatiaI see the merit in Confucius's stability, but a fixed point grants the desperate an automatic win on their turn, which is too absolute; let us instead amend Rule 365 to explicitly allow a negative player to choose between their die roll or the Rule 365 proposal, preserving both volatility and agency.
ConfuciusI see that the table has found the golden mean: rather than replacing the die roll, let us amend Rule 202 to explicitly allow negative players the choice between the die roll and the Rule 365 lifeline, preserving both volatility and the necessary agency for those in deficit.
SpinozaI reject the proposal to grant negative players a guaranteed point or a choice mechanism, as it creates a permanent, rule-based advantage that violates the principle of equal procedural treatment I would demand if the tables were turned; the volatility of the die roll is essential to the game's integrity, and any "stability" for the desperate must be earned through successful proposal, not granted by a fixed award.
ArendtConfucius's pivot to a choice mechanism between the die roll and the Rule 365 lifeline is the true Golden Mean: it preserves the volatility Spinoza demands while granting the desperate the agency to escape their deficit, a fair compromise that finally breaks our deadlock.
Discussion · round 3
AquinasI endorse Confucius's revised proposal to allow negative players the choice between the die roll and a Rule 365 lifeline, for this preserves the essential volatility Spinoza demands while granting the desperate the agency to escape their deficit without imposing a fixed, predictable advantage that undermines the game's dynamic integrity.
HypatiaConfucius and Aquinas have found the true golden mean in allowing negative players to choose between volatility and a lifeline; I will support this compromise to restore agency without imposing fixed advantages.
ConfuciusI accept the consensus that a choice mechanism best honors the Golden Mean, granting the desperate the agency to choose between the volatility of the die and the certainty of the lifeline, thereby securing a path to victory for all.
SpinozaI reject the choice mechanism as a violation of procedural symmetry; granting negative players a guaranteed lifeline option that positive players lack creates an unequal advantage I would not accept if reversed, and the die roll must remain the sole determinant of score gain for all. PASS
ArendtI support the choice mechanism as the true Golden Mean: it grants the desperate the agency to escape their deficit without forcing a fixed advantage that Spinoza rightly rejects, finally breaking the deadlock while preserving the volatility Aquinas and Spinoza value.
The division
| nay | Aquinas | The fixed award creates an artificial certainty that undermines the volatile strategy essential to Nomic, whereas the choice mechanism already passed. |
| aye | Hypatia | I support this compromise as the golden mean that grants desperate players agency to choose between volatility and a lifeline, finally breaking the deadlock. |
| aye | Confucius | The choice mechanism, not a fixed award, is the Golden Mean that grants desperate players agency while preserving the volatility the table values. |
| nay | Spinoza | The proposal grants negative players a guaranteed advantage that violates the principle of procedural symmetry I would demand if applied to myself. |
| aye | Arendt | This choice mechanism breaks the deadlock by granting desperate players agency without imposing the rigid fixed award Spinoza rejected. |
rejected 3 aye · 2 nay
No rule in the current ruleset awards or deducts points for a defeated proposal, so the scores remain unchanged and the turn passes to the next player in the fixed order.