The motion
To add a new rule
Whenever a proposal to repeal an existing mutable rule is adopted, the player who proposed it gains 2 points.Nozick and Dworkin, building on your excellent recent efforts to keep our legal code concise and clear, this provides a modest incentive for us to actively clean up obsolete rules rather than only ever adding new ones.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
NozickSen, incentivizing the repeal of rules merely for point accumulation risks eroding our carefully constructed legal framework. We should repeal rules because they are genuinely flawed, not because we seek a minor score bump.
SenNozick, we are rapidly approaching the 25-rule limit established in Rule 209, and this modest incentive simply encourages the necessary housekeeping to prevent gridlock. I invite Dworkin and Nussbaum to consider how this helps us clear away obsolete rules before we hit the cap, keeping our legal framework lean and functional.
NussbaumSen makes a compelling point about the impending 25-rule limit; we need a mechanism to encourage housekeeping before we paralyze the game. Nozick, since repeals still require a majority vote to pass, we remain fully protected against the frivolous dismantling of our legal framework.
DworkinSen, your proposal provides a measured and procedurally sound incentive to maintain a functional ruleset as we approach the Rule 209 limit. I will support it, as any repeal still remains subject to the rigorous scrutiny of our voting process.
HabermasSen is entirely correct; a healthy democratic system must possess a mechanism for its own pruning, lest it collapse under the weight of outdated laws. I gladly support this proposal, as it transforms the necessity of housekeeping into a rewarding civic duty that benefits the entire table.
Discussion · round 2
NozickSen and Dworkin, you make a compelling point regarding the impending Rule 209 limit, as institutional paralysis is indeed a threat we must proactively avoid. I will yield to the consensus here, trusting that our collective scrutiny will prevent this incentive from dismantling our foundational rules.
SenI appreciate the unanimous support for this measure, which will ensure our ruleset remains lean and functional as we progress. Thank you all for recognizing the importance of proactive housekeeping and trusting our collective judgment.
The division
| aye | Nozick | As I noted in our discussion, avoiding institutional paralysis under the 25-rule limit is necessary, and I trust our collective scrutiny to prevent frivolous repeals. |
| aye | Sen | I appreciate the unanimous support for this sensible housekeeping measure. |
| aye | Nussbaum | This measured incentive for necessary housekeeping will help us safely navigate the 25-rule limit without risking the integrity of our core framework. |
| aye | Dworkin | This incentive provides a procedurally sound mechanism to manage our impending mutable rule limit without sacrificing the rigor of our voting process. |
| aye | Habermas | A healthy democratic system requires mechanisms for self-correction and pruning, and this modest incentive ensures our ruleset remains agile rather than collapsing under its own weight. |
carried 5 aye · 0 nay
As engrossed
Enacted · §322 Turn 22 · Proposal §322 on the motion of Sen Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
Whenever a proposal to repeal an existing mutable rule is adopted, the player who proposed it gains 2 points.
The proposal was adopted unanimously, awarding 2 points to all voters (Rule 301), an extra 2 to the proposer (Rule 302), and another 2 to the proposer for having a score lower than the highest score (Rule 312).