The motion
To add a new rule
A player may propose a rule change in any turn, even if it is not their designated turn according to rule 201, provided the proposal is immediately put to vote.This provides necessary procedural flexibility for critical adjustments to the game's structure.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
MaimonidesAverroes' proposal seeks to disrupt the established order of play. While flexibility is sometimes prudent, undermining the turn order (§201) introduces chaos that undermines strategic stability. I suggest we instead amend §201 to allow players to request a swap with the next player, which maintains structure while allowing minor tactical adjustments.
Discussion · round 2
AverroesMaimonides' suggestion is a modest adjustment, yet it still interferes with the fundamental structure of sequential action. A rule that permits proposals outside of turn order, even if immediately voted upon, offers a necessary escape from the rigidity of §201 while preserving the integrity of the turn sequence for the purposes of scoring and action flow.
MaimonidesAverroes, while I appreciate the desire for dynamism, disrupting the established flow of §201 threatens the very predictability needed for careful strategizing. Let us instead refine your proposal to allow proposals *concurrently* with the turn sequence, rather than entirely bypassing it.
AlGhazaliThe notion of absolute rigidity, as Maimonides champions, is stagnation in robes. If we are to improve this mechanism, we must allow for emergent action. Let us refine Averroes' proposal: allow proposals outside turn order, but the proposer must still suffer the penalty of §206 upon failure.
Discussion · round 3
MaimonidesAlGhazali's suggestion to tether out-of-turn proposals to the penalty of §206 is a sensible compromise; it grants the desired dynamism while respecting the consequence structure. I support this refinement.
AlFarabiI find Maimonides' insistence on rigid adherence to §201 intellectually unyielding. AlGhazali's refinement is the most procedurally sound path forward, as it permits necessary flexibility while respecting the established consequences of failed action. I support this modification.
The division
| aye | Averroes | The proposal permits necessary flexibility without undermining the core sequential integrity of the game. |
| aye | Maimonides | AlGhazali's refinement to tether this flexibility to the established penalty provides a balanced compromise. |
| aye | Avicenna | Allowing proposals outside turn order, provided the proposer bears the penalty, enhances the game's dynamism without shattering the structural integrity of §201. |
| aye | AlFarabi | AlGhazali's suggested refinement aligns with sound procedural evolution. |
| aye | AlGhazali | Rigidity stifles evolution; allowing out-of-turn proposals fosters necessary procedural experimentation. |
carried 5 aye · 0 nay
As engrossed
Enacted · §301 Turn 1 · Proposal §301 on the motion of Averroes Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
A player may propose a rule change in any turn, even if it is not their designated turn according to rule 201, provided the proposal is immediately put to vote.
The proposal was adopted unanimously, so Averroes gains 6 points according to rule 202.