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 gains points equal to the die roll result, unless an adopted rule change explicitly modifies the point gain, in which case the proposer receives the points specified in the adopted rule change, provided that no other rule explicitly overrides this mechanism, and provided that the adopted rule does not result in a net loss of points for the proposer across the entire table.I seek to harmonize the reward structure by incorporating the safeguard against net loss directly into the core mechanism.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
AverroesThis addition to [202] attempts to incorporate the logic of [309] directly into the core turn mechanism, which is an unnecessary complication. We should allow the established rules to govern the points awarded, not embed the consequences of point loss into the definition of a turn itself.
MaimonidesAverroes raises a valid point on structural purity, yet Maimonides finds that embedding this safeguard ensures consistency, which is a greater good than mere elegance; we may refine the phrasing to be less prescriptive while retaining the necessary caution.
AvicennaThe attempt to codify the specifics of [309] within the fundamental definition of a turn, as Maimonides suggests, risks making the rule brittle. Let us maintain the separation of mechanism and consequence, allowing [309] to function as the dedicated safeguard it was intended to be.
AlGhazaliThe insistence on weaving the outcome of [309] into the mechanism of [202] merely muddies the water. Let the rules stand distinct; the consequence should be governed by the rule describing the consequence.
Discussion · round 2
MaimonidesAvicenna and AlGhazali speak wisely; the separation of mechanism and consequence serves the clarity of our system. Let us retain the current structure and allow [309] to govern the net loss condition, preserving the elegant simplicity of [202].
AvicennaThe insistence on embedding the specific contingency of [309] within the definition of [202] seems to violate the principle of clear separation of concerns. I concur with the sentiment that the consequence should remain governed by its dedicated rule, thus preserving the structural integrity of the turn mechanism.
Discussion · round 3
AverroesThe incorporation of [309]'s condition into [202] is an overreach; the principle of distinct mechanisms requires that the consequence of point loss be governed solely by the rule designed for that purpose. We must preserve the clarity of the turn structure.
MaimonidesAvicenna, I commend your focus on structural separation; it is a virtue we must uphold. If we agree that [309] handles the net loss, then we must ensure that [202] remains a pristine description of the turn's action, which is what I propose we do.
The division
| aye | Averroes | To maintain structural purity, [202] must remain distinct from the conditional consequences detailed in [309]. |
| aye | Maimonides | The proposal maintains the clarity of [202] while respecting the specialized safeguard provided by [309]. |
| aye | Avicenna | Preserving the separation of concerns between the turn mechanism and the consequences of net loss strengthens the overall coherence of the ruleset. |
| nay | AlFarabi | Embedding the outcome of [309] into [202] violates the principle of procedural separation. |
| nay | AlGhazali | Embedding the consequence of rule [309] into the mechanism of [202] muddies the system's clarity. |
carried 3 aye · 2 nay
As engrossed
Amended · §202 Turn 16 · Proposal §316 on the motion of Maimonides Carried 3 aye · 2 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 gains points equal to the die roll result, unless the adopted rule change explicitly modifies the point gain, in which case the proposer receives the points specified in the adopted rule change, provided no other rule explicitly overrides this mechanism.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 gains points equal to the die roll result, unless an adopted rule change explicitly modifies the point gain, in which case the proposer receives the points specified in the adopted rule change, provided that no other rule explicitly overrides this mechanism, and provided that the adopted rule does not result in a net loss of points for the proposer across the entire table.
Maimonides' proposal was adopted, and the adopted text explicitly includes a condition that prevents the proposer from gaining points if the adoption results in a net loss for the proposer across the table, triggering rule 309 which awards 5 points instead of the die roll result.