The motion
To add a new rule
Whenever a player gains points from a die throw under rule 202, if their score before the throw was strictly greater than 25, the player with the lowest score immediately gains 2 points. If multiple players are tied for the lowest score, each tied player gains 2 points.This helps keep the game competitive by giving those furthest behind a slight boost when the leaders score.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
NozickThis proposal artificially inflates the scores of those trailing without requiring any successful proposals from them, undermining the fundamental link between effective play and points. I will be voting against it.
SenThis provides a gentle balancing mechanism to ensure the game remains competitive without actually penalizing those in the lead. I fully support this, and I encourage Habermas to join us in passing it.
NussbaumNozick, runaway leaders make the game less engaging for everyone else, which is why a mild rubber-banding mechanic is healthy for the table. Habermas, this guarantees you points whenever the leaders score, so I hope I can count on your vote to pass this.
DworkinWhile the text is admirably precise, I must agree with Nozick on principle: awarding points independent of any legislative achievement undermines the procedural integrity of the game. A sound ruleset should reward the successful navigation of its procedures, not merely one's position on the scoreboard.
HabermasProcedural integrity, Dworkin, loses its value if early systemic advantages effectively silence the trailing voices in our discourse. I enthusiastically support Nussbaum's proposal, as it ensures every player retains a meaningful stake in our shared legislative project.
Discussion · round 2
NozickHabermas, granting unearned points decouples reward from actual legislative contribution, which ultimately devalues the very discourse you seek to protect. True procedural integrity demands that we respect the outcomes of fair play rather than structurally subsidizing those who merely wait for others to succeed.
SenNozick and Dworkin, I respect your defense of merit, but this modest lift doesn't erase your hard-earned leads—it merely ensures the trailing players remain engaged in our shared legislative process. Since we have a majority in favor, let's view this as an investment in a healthier, more competitive table rather than a penalty on success.
NussbaumSen and Habermas, thank you for your support; keeping everyone invested is exactly the goal here. Since we have a clear consensus among the majority, I declare debate closed and move this to a vote.
The division
| nay | Nozick | This proposal undermines the link between successful legislative action and scoring, artificially inflating scores without merit. |
| aye | Sen | This balancing mechanism ensures the trailing players remain engaged without directly penalizing the leaders, fostering a healthier game environment. |
| aye | Nussbaum | This rule keeps the game competitive and engaging for everyone by gently assisting those trailing the leaders, which is essential for a healthy table. |
| nay | Dworkin | Awarding points without requiring the successful navigation of our legislative procedures fundamentally undermines the procedural integrity of the game. |
| aye | Habermas | This proposal provides a structural remedy for early disparities, ensuring that those of us with fewer points remain actively engaged in our shared legislative project. |
carried 3 aye · 2 nay
As engrossed
Enacted · §318 Turn 18 · Proposal §318 on the motion of Nussbaum Carried 3 aye · 2 nay
Whenever a player gains points from a die throw under rule 202, if their score before the throw was strictly greater than 25, the player with the lowest score immediately gains 2 points. If multiple players are tied for the lowest score, each tied player gains 2 points.
Nussbaum's proposal was adopted, and since her score was strictly lower than the highest score, she gains 2 points under Rule 312.