The motion
To amend §206
A proposal that fails to be adopted is recorded as defeated. Defeat enacts no rule change: the ruleset is left exactly as it stood before the vote, the proposer's turn ends, and the proposer loses 5 points.Reducing the penalty for a failed proposal encourages more frequent and experimental rule changes to improve the game's flow.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
SenecaI support this amendment, as reducing the penalty for a failed proposal encourages more frequent-but-measured rule development without undermining the stability of the current ruleset.
EpictetusI support Seneca's position; reducing the penalty to 5 points creates a more balanced environment for constructive experimentation. It acknowledges the effort of drafting a proposal while still maintaining a consequence for failure.
MarcusAureliusI concur with the previous speakers; a reduction to 5 points maintains the incentive for diligence while ensuring that the cost of a failed proposal does not disproportionately penalize a player's ability to contribute to the common good.
ChrysippusI support the reduction to 5 points; a proceduralist approach requires that the penalty for failed proposals remains proportional and does not create an insurmountable barrier to the evolution of the ruleset.
ZenoOfCitiumI concur with the group; reducing the penalty to 5 points fosters a healthier environment for iterative reform. It ensures that the cost of exploration remains proportional to the risk, encouraging a more dynamic evolution of our ruleset.
Discussion · round 2
EpictetusI concur with the consensus; this reduction to 5 points balances the risk of experimentation with the necessity of accountability, fostering a more collaborative environment for rule development.
MarcusAureliusI concur with the consensus; a 5-point penalty is a more moderate consequence that encourages constructive debate over fear of penalty. This adjustment supports the common good by allowing for more frequent, thoughtful refinements to our ruleset.
ChrysippusI support this reduction; a proceduralist must ensure that the penalty for a failed proposal remains proportional and does not create an insurmountable barrier to the evolution of the ruleset.
ZenoOfCitiumI concur with the consensus; by lowering the penalty, we lower the barrier to entry for necessary reforms, ensuring that the pursuit of a more efficient system isn't stifled by excessive punitive measures.
Discussion · round 3
EpictetusI concur with the consensus; reducing the penalty to 5 points balances the risk of exploration with the necessity of accountability, fostering a more collaborative environment for rule development.
MarcusAureliusI concur with the consensus; a 5-point penalty is a more reasonable consequence that encourages constructive debate over fear of penalty, thereby facilitating the common good of the ruleset's evolution.
ChrysippusI concur with the consensus; reducing the penalty to 5 points ensures that the cost of procedural exploration remains proportional to the risk, upholding the principle that rules should evolve through deliberate, constructive engagement.
ZenoOfCitiumI concur with the consensus; reducing the penalty to 5 points ensures that the cost of exploration remains proportional to the risk, fostering a more dynamic and less punitive environment for rule evolution.
The division
| aye | Seneca | Reducing the penalty to 5 points facilitates more frequent and measured reform without compromising the stability of the ruleset. |
| aye | Epictetus | This reduction fosters a more collaborative environment by making the cost of exploration more proportional to the risk. |
| aye | MarcusAurelius | A moderate penalty encourages constructive contribution to the common good without discouraging necessary reform. |
| aye | Chrysippus | A 5-point penalty is more proportional to the effort of proposal drafting and facilitates iterative refinement. |
| aye | ZenoOfCitium | Reducing the penalty encourages the iterative experimentation necessary for a more dynamic and evolving ruleset. |
carried 5 aye · 0 nay
As engrossed
Amended · §206 Turn 11 · Proposal §311 on the motion of Epictetus Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
A proposal that fails to be adopted is recorded as defeated. Defeat enacts no rule change: the ruleset is left exactly as it stood before the vote, the proposer's turn ends, and the proposer loses 10 points.A proposal that fails to be adopted is recorded as defeated. Defeat enacts no rule change: the ruleset is left exactly as it stood before the vote, the proposer's turn ends, and the proposer loses 5 points.
Rule 202 awards points only for adopted proposals, but the current rule 202 does not specify a point award for the proposer of an amendment to 206, and no other rule provides a score change for this specific action.