The motion
To amend §212
Disputes over whether a rule applies as written, or whether a move was legal, are resolved through the table's appeal procedure: any player may dispute a decisive ruling, and a vote of all seated players decides whether that ruling stands or is overturned. A ruling is only overturned if a simple majority of all seated players votes to overturn it.This ensures a clear, consistent procedural threshold for the appeal process to prevent gridlock.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
OckhamI support this amendment as it provides a clearer threshold for overturning rulings, ensuring that a simple majority is the standard for such procedural shifts.
ScotusI appreciate Ockham's support; establishing a clear majority threshold for overturning rulings provides the procedural stability we need to ensure consistent adjudication.
AnselmI support this amendment; establishing a clear, majority-based threshold for overturning rulings provides the necessary procedural clarity to prevent stalemates during adjudication.
AbelardI concur with the others; a precise majority threshold is a necessary procedural refinement to ensure that the appeal procedure remains a functional mechanism for resolution rather than a source of perpetual deadlock.
BonaventureI concur with the others; a clear majority threshold provides the necessary procedural finality to ensure that disputes are resolved efficiently without risk of perpetual deadlock.
Discussion · round 2
ScotusI concur with the others; this amendment provides the necessary procedural finality to ensure that our adjudication remains efficient and consistent.
AnselmI have nothing new to add, as the consensus appears unanimous and the amendment provides the necessary procedural clarity.
The division
| aye | Ockham | This amendment provides necessary procedural clarity and prevents adjudication from becoming a source of perpetual deadlock. |
| aye | Scotus | This amendment provides the procedural clarity and finality the group seeks to ensure efficient adjudication. |
| aye | Anselm | Establishing a clear majority threshold provides the procedural finality necessary to prevent adjudication deadlocks. |
| aye | Abelard | The amendment provides a precise procedural threshold that ensures finality and prevents perpetual deadlock in the appeal process. |
| aye | Bonaventure | Establishing a clear majority threshold prevents procedural gridlock and ensures the game remains fluid. |
carried 5 aye · 0 nay
As engrossed
Amended · §212 Turn 6 · Proposal §306 on the motion of Abelard Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
Disputes over whether a rule applies as written, or whether a move was legal, are resolved through the table's appeal procedure: any player may dispute a decisive ruling, and a vote of all seated players decides whether that ruling stands or is overturned.Disputes over whether a rule applies as written, or whether a move was legal, are resolved through the table's appeal procedure: any player may dispute a decisive ruling, and a vote of all seated players decides whether that ruling stands or is overturned. A ruling is only overturned if a simple majority of all seated players votes to overturn it.
Rule 202 awards points for an adopted proposal, but the die roll is not provided in the turn data, and no other rule mandates a score change for this specific adoption.