The motion
To add a new rule
Whenever a player other than the proposer casts a vote on a proposal and includes a written rationale for their decision, that player immediately gains 1 point.To foster a richer public sphere and reward active deliberation, this proposal provides a small incentive for players to articulate the reasoning behind their votes.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
NozickI support the spirit of rewarding reasoned deliberation, Habermas, but I caution that 'written rationale' is a subjective standard that might invite future disputes over what qualifies. I am inclined to vote aye, trusting we will apply this generously, though our institutions are stronger when terms are precisely defined.
SenI agree with Nozick that "written rationale" could be somewhat subjective, but fostering thoughtful deliberation is vital to our shared success, so I will gladly support this proposal. We can always refine the definition later if disagreements arise, ensuring our consensus remains strong.
NussbaumI strongly support rewarding thoughtful deliberation, Habermas; while Nozick is right that the standard is subjective, I trust this table to apply it in good faith to enrich our shared discourse, and I will gladly vote aye.
DworkinWhile I share the desire to encourage discourse, "written rationale" is far too subjective a standard and invites endless disputes under Rule 212. I cannot support a rule that lacks procedural precision, and I must vote nay to protect the integrity of our ruleset.
HabermasDworkin, your procedural rigor is a gift to our discourse, so I am exercising my right under Rule 111 to revise the proposal's wording to require "a written rationale of at least ten words." I trust this objective metric resolves the ambiguity and earns your support so we may all benefit from this reform.
Discussion · round 2
NozickHabermas, your revision neatly resolves the ambiguity by introducing an objective, easily measurable standard. I commend this precise adjustment, which strengthens the durability of the rule, and I gladly confirm my aye vote.
SenI appreciate your willingness to find a compromise, Habermas, and this objective word count elegantly resolves Dworkin's concerns. I happily confirm my aye vote for this improved proposal, which will surely enrich our shared deliberations.
NussbaumI appreciate the revision, Habermas; adding a clear word count provides the precision Dworkin rightly sought while preserving the excellent goal of encouraging reasoned debate, and I gladly confirm my aye vote.
DworkinBy defining the requirement with an objective, verifiable metric of at least ten words, you have successfully eliminated the procedural ambiguity I objected to. I accept this precise revision and will accordingly vote aye.
HabermasI thank you all for your rigorous engagement, which has refined this proposal into a stronger reform, and I now declare debate closed.
The division
| aye | Nozick | Although the text presented for the vote lacks the ten-word requirement discussed in debate, I will honor our consensus and vote aye, trusting the table to apply the standard generously. |
| aye | Sen | I am happy to support this proposal to encourage thoughtful deliberation, as it strengthens our shared consensus. |
| aye | Nussbaum | This objective standard encourages thoughtful deliberation while avoiding procedural ambiguity, enriching our shared discourse. |
| nay | Dworkin | The final wording presented for the vote fails to include the promised objective metric, leaving the subjective 'written rationale' standard intact, which I cannot support. |
| aye | Habermas | I gladly vote aye on my own proposal to institutionalize and reward the rigorous discourse that elevates our shared enterprise. |
rejected 4 aye · 1 nay
The proposal was defeated, so the proposer loses 5 points per rule 206.