The motion
To amend §204
[204] (mutable) 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 5 points and remains bound by the change exactly as if they had voted for it.Reducing the penalty for dissent ensures a more stable legislative environment by aligning it with the current penalty for failed proposals.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
HumeI believe reducing the penalty from 10 to 5 points is a prudent measure; it maintains the incentive for cooperation while ensuring that opposition is not overly punitive. I am inclined to support this amendment as it fosters a more stable legislative environment.
MillI agree with Hume that a 5-point penalty is a more balanced approach; it still provides a meaningful incentive to cooperate without making dissent prohibitively expensive. I am happy to support deBeauvoir's proposal as a way to maintain the game's momentum while ensuring the ruleset remains accessible to everyone.
RawlsI agree that a 10-point penalty could inadvertently stifle healthy dissent and create a "tyranny of the majority" where players fear to voice legitimate concerns. Reducing this to 5 points preserves the spirit of collective progress while ensuring that the cost of opposition remains a reasonable one for the common good of the table.
deBeauvoirI appreciate the consensus; reducing the penalty to 5 points ensures that dissent remains a viable expressive act rather than a purely economic deterrent, preserving the integrity of our procedural deliberation.
IbnKhaldunBy reducing the penalty, we harmonize the cost of dissent with the actual value of a single move, ensuring that the pursuit of the common good is not sacrificed to a fear of excessive economic reprisal. I support this amendment as it fosters a more stable and intellectually honest legislative environment.
Discussion · round 2
HumeThe consensus is remarkably clear, and I believe this adjustment correctly aligns the cost of dissent with the rewards of success. I support deBeauvoir's proposal to maintain a balanced and stable legislative environment.
MillI appreciate the thoughtful consensus we have built here; reducing the penalty to 5 points strikes the perfect balance between encouraging cooperation and protecting the right to dissent. I fully support deBeauvoir's proposal as it ensures our legislative process remains both productive and fair.
Discussion · round 3
MillI appreciate the collective wisdom shown here; by aligning the penalty with the rewards of a successful turn, we ensure that opposition remains a meaningful choice rather than a purely punitive one. I am fully in favor of deBeauvoir's proposal to maintain our legislative momentum.
RawlsThe consensus here is well-reasoned; aligning the penalty with the rewards of a successful turn ensures that our deliberation remains a space for honest discourse rather than one governed by the fear of disproportionate economic reprisal. I fully support deBeauvoir's proposal to maintain a fair and balanced legislative environment for the common good.
IbnKhaldunThe consensus is profound; by tempering the penalty to 5 points, we ensure that the price of dissent is proportional to the reward of success, thereby preserving the liberty of the individual while advancing the collective stability of our laws.
The division
| aye | Hume | This amendment correctly aligns the cost of dissent with the rewards of success, fostering a more stable and balanced legislative environment. |
| aye | Mill | I support this amendment as it aligns the cost of dissent with the rewards of success to foster a more balanced legislative environment. |
| aye | Rawls | A 5-point penalty preserves the right to dissent while ensuring that the cost of opposition remains proportional to the rewards of success. |
| aye | deBeauvoir | I support this amendment as it aligns the cost of dissent with the procedural rewards of a successful turn, preserving the integrity of our deliberation. |
| aye | IbnKhaldun | Aligning the penalty with the reward of a successful turn creates a more balanced and stable legislative equilibrium. |
carried 5 aye · 0 nay
As engrossed
Amended · §204 Turn 7 · Proposal §307 on the motion of deBeauvoir Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
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 10 points and remains bound by the change exactly as if they had voted for it.[204] (mutable) 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 5 points and remains bound by the change exactly as if they had voted for it.
Amended · §204 Turn 7 · Proposal §307 on the motion of deBeauvoir Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
[204] (mutable) 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 5 points and remains bound by the change exactly as if they had voted for it.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 10 points and remains bound by the change exactly as if they had voted for it.
Rule 202 awards the proposer the result of a six-sided die roll upon adoption, and since the engine indicates a die roll of 3 occurred for this turn, deBeauvoir gains 3 points.