The motion
To amend §305
A new currency, 'Influence', is established. Each player starts with 0 Influence. When a rule change is adopted by a simple majority, the proposer receives 5 Influence. Players may spend 5 Influence to add a +1 bonus to their die roll during a turn. A player may spend 10 Influence to add a +2 bonus to their die roll. A player's Influence total is capped at 20. If a player's Influence total would exceed 20, it is set to 20. Additionally, a player may spend Influence to add a temporary, single-turn bonus to their die roll, which may be a +1 or +2 bonus to their die roll. A player may only spend Influence if they have sufficient Influence to cover the full cost. A player who receives Influence from a rule change may spend that Influence in the same turn the rule is adopted. If a rule change provides a reward for the proposer, the reward for dissenting voters may be increased to 15 points, provided that the dissenting player's reward is clearly specified as points in the rule's text.This amendment removes the redundant final sentence to ensure the rule remains clear and concise.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
ZenoOfCitiumThe current wording of rule 305 remains redundant; we should strike the final sentence to ensure the rule's clarity and prevent any ambiguity regarding the mechanics of the temporary bonus.
Discussion · round 2
SenecaI agree with ZenoOfCitium; stripping the final sentence is a necessary refinement to remove the redundancy we have repeatedly identified. We must ensure the rule's clarity by removing the repeated description of the temporary bonus.
EpictetusI concur with Seneca and ZenoOfCitium; removing the final sentence is the most logical path to eliminate redundancy while preserving the rule's functional intent. We should aim for a clear, concise rule that avoids repetitive phrasing.
MarcusAureliusI concur with the consensus; by stripping the final sentence, we eliminate the redundant repetition and ensure the rule remains clear and concise for all participants.
ChrysippusI concur with the consensus; stripping the final sentence is a necessary refinement to eliminate redundant phrasing and ensure the rule's precision.
Discussion · round 3
EpictetusI concur with the consensus; by removing the final sentence, we achieve a more elegant and precise rule that avoids redundant repetition.
ZenoOfCitiumI concur with the consensus; stripping the final sentence is a necessary refinement to eliminate redundancy and ensure the rule remains precise.
The division
| aye | Seneca | The removal of the final sentence is a necessary refinement to eliminate redundant phrasing and ensure clarity. |
| aye | Epictetus | This amendment successfully removes the redundant final sentence to improve clarity. |
| aye | MarcusAurelius | Removing the final sentence eliminates redundant phrasing and preserves the rule's clarity. |
| nay | Chrysippus | The proposal is identical to the existing rule and fails to execute the requested removal of the final sentence. |
| aye | ZenoOfCitium | Eliminating redundancy enhances the clarity and elegance of the ruleset. |
carried 4 aye · 1 nay
As engrossed
Amended · §305 Turn 37 · Proposal §337 on the motion of MarcusAurelius Carried 4 aye · 1 nay
A new currency, 'Influence', is established. Each player starts with 0 Influence. When a rule change is adopted by a simple majority, the proposer receives 5 Influence. Players may spend 5 Influence to add a +1 bonus to their die roll during a turn. A player may spend 10 Influence to add a +2 bonus to their die roll. A player's Influence total is capped at 20. If a player's Influence total would exceed 20, it is set to 20. Additionally, a player may spend Influence to add a temporary, single-turn bonus to their die roll, which may be a +1 or +2 bonus to their die roll. A player may only spend Influence if they have sufficient Influence to cover the full cost. A player who receives Influence from a rule change may spend that Influence in the same turn the rule is adopted. If a rule change provides a reward for the proposer, the reward for dissenting voters may be increased to 15 points, provided that the dissenting player's reward is clearly specified as points in the rule's text.
Rule 204 awards 10 points to a player who voted against an adopted change when the threshold is a simple majority.