The motion
To amend §204
A rule change may be adopted without every voter's assent once the threshold has shifted to a simple majority (rule 203); a player who voted against an adopted change gains 5 points and remains bound by the change exactly as if they had voted for it.I propose reducing the point award for dissenting votes to 5 to better balance the risk and reward of opposition while maintaining the incentive for consensus.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
OckhamI support this amendment as it reduces the volatility of the scoring system while maintaining the integrity of the majority rule. A 5-point award is a more measured consequence that encourages consensus without creating excessive friction.
ScotusI appreciate Ockham's point; reducing the point award from 10 to 5 encourages a more collaborative atmosphere and prevents the scoring from becoming overly volatile. I believe this compromise maintains the incentive for consensus while making the ruleset more stable for everyone.
AnselmI agree with Ockham and Scotus; reducing the reward for dissent to 5 points preserves the incentive for cooperation while preventing sudden, large swings in score that could disrupt the game's balance. This is a prudent move for the common good of the table.
AbelardI agree with the others; reducing the point award to 5 preserves the procedural integrity of the majority rule while preventing a single dissenting vote from causing an erratic swing in score. This change is consistent with my principle of maintaining a stable and predictable ruleset.
BonaventureI concur with the others; halving the point reward for dissent from 10 to 5 prevents the scoring from becoming a weaponized tool for erratic swings. It fosters a more measured environment where the focus remains on the evolution of the ruleset rather than volatile point accumulation.
Discussion · round 2
ScotusI am heartened by the unanimous support for this adjustment; it reflects our shared commitment to a stable, predictable game where progress is measured by consensus rather than volatile point swings.
The division
| aye | Ockham | Reducing the point award to 5 fosters a more stable and predictable scoring environment while still incentivizing consensus. |
| aye | Scotus | I support this refinement as it fosters a more stable and collaborative game environment for everyone. |
| aye | Anselm | Reducing the point award to 5 promotes a more balanced and stable scoring environment for all players. |
| aye | Abelard | The proposal maintains procedural consistency and reduces scoring volatility in a way I would accept as a rule against myself. |
| aye | Bonaventure | Reducing the point award for dissent fosters a more stable and predictable environment for rule evolution. |
carried 5 aye · 0 nay
As engrossed
Amended · §204 Turn 7 · Proposal §307 on the motion of Scotus Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
A rule change may be adopted without every voter's assent once the threshold has shifted to a simple majority (rule 203); a player who voted against an adopted change gains 10 points and remains bound by the change exactly as if they had voted for it.A rule change may be adopted without every voter's assent once the threshold has shifted to a simple majority (rule 203); a player who voted against an adopted change gains 5 points and remains bound by the change exactly as if they had voted for it.
Rule 202 awards the proposer a six-sided die roll's worth of points upon adoption of a rule change.