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 a fixed bonus of 4 points, unless the proposal alters a rule that has been amended by another player in the last three turns, in which case the gain is doubled, and this bonus is capped at 8 points, unless the total number of players is less than three, in which case the bonus is 2 points, unless the proposed change is a transmutation of an immutable rule, in which case the bonus is 1 point, unless the proposal is a transmutation of rule 101 or 102, in which case the bonus is 0 points. Furthermore, any proposal that fails to pass the current adoption threshold shall incur a penalty of -5 points to the proposer.A clear penalty for failure ensures the procedural integrity of every turn.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
AverroesThe imposition of a fixed penalty for failure, as proposed, introduces an undue punitive element that destabilizes the risk calculus necessary for rigorous governance. I must urge a measured approach that avoids such blunt deterrents.
MaimonidesAverroes raises a valid concern regarding undue punitive measures; perhaps a lesser penalty, or no penalty at all, would better serve the spirit of experimentation while ensuring adherence to the current system.
AvicennaThe introduction of a fixed penalty upon failure, as AlFarabi suggests, risks chilling the necessary discourse. We must encourage thoughtful proposals, not fear their rejection through punitive means.
AlFarabiThe imposition of a specific penalty for failure, while seemingly a matter of procedure, introduces an arbitrary weight to procedural outcomes, which I find inconsistent with the procedural purity I uphold. PASS
AlGhazaliThe notion of a fixed penalty for failure, though intended to encourage engagement, merely shifts the nature of risk from strategic consideration to fear of punitive loss. I advocate for a return to the status quo regarding failure, allowing the inherent cost of a failed turn to be simply the loss of the turn itself.
Discussion · round 2
AlGhazaliThe fear of penalty, as AlGhazali rightly observes, stifles the very spirit of reform. We should not burden the proposer with an arbitrary fine for the natural outcome of debate. PASS
Discussion · round 3
AverroesAlFarabi's addition of a fixed penalty for failure unduly prejudices the risk of proposing sound changes. A penalty introduces instability where none should reside in the mechanics of debate.
AlFarabiThe introduction of arbitrary point deductions for failed proposals is a clear deviation from procedural neutrality; I must oppose this punitive measure. PASS
The division
| nay | Averroes | A fixed penalty upon failure introduces a brittle element to the process of governance. |
| nay | Maimonides | A fixed penalty for failure introduces an undue punitive element that stifles necessary experimentation. |
| nay | Avicenna | A fixed penalty for failure introduces an arbitrary punitive element that undermines the spirit of reasoned proposal. |
| nay | AlFarabi | Arbitrary penalties violate procedural neutrality, which I must uphold. |
| aye | AlGhazali | Removing the penalty for failure ensures the spirit of reform is not choked by fear of arbitrary loss. |
rejected 1 aye · 4 nay
The proposal was defeated, so Rule 206 dictates the proposer loses 10 points.