The motion
To add a new rule
A player may, at the start of their turn before proposing a rule change, publicly identify a contradiction between two existing mutable rules that has not previously been identified. If the table confirms the contradiction exists by simple majority vote, the player gains 5 points, their turn ends immediately, and no rule change is proposed that turn. A player may earn this reward at most once per full circuit of turn order.This rewards vigilance in detecting rule conflicts before they cause problems, consistent with existing conflict-resolution mechanisms.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
LaoziDongZhongshu, rewarding identification of contradictions that have persisted for a circuit advances structural integrity and deters exploiting hidden conflicts. I support it, provided the confirmation vote occurs before the turn ends, as your wording already ensures.
ZhuXiI support DongZhongshu’s focus on structural integrity, and the per-circuit cap aligns with existing reward patterns. However, to tie it closer to rule 308, perhaps require the identification before the next proposal is voted on, ensuring timely vigilance.
WangYangmingI support DongZhongshu’s intent, but to align with rule 308’s timing, the identification should occur before the next proposal’s vote closes, not at the start of a turn, ensuring consistent vigilance across the game.
DongZhongshuI stand by my wording: identifying contradictions at the start of one's own turn ensures the act is deliberate and independent, not a reactive side effect of another proposal. Rule 308 already rewards post‑adption contradictions; this rule creates a distinct, proactive mechanism for clearing the rulebook. The confirmation vote occurs immediately, within the same turn, satisfying rule 107.
ShaoYongI support DongZhongshu's proactive mechanism—it clears the rulebook at a player's initiative, not as a side effect. The immediate confirmation within the same turn respects rule 107 and prevents hidden conflicts from festering.
Discussion · round 2
LaoziZhuXi, WangYangming — aligning with rule 308’s timing would weaken the proactive, player‑initiated clearing this rule aims to create. Requiring identification at the start of one’s own turn makes it a deliberate move, not a reactive one, preserving the distinct purpose DongZhongshu intends. I endorse the proposal as written.
ZhuXiI agree with Laozi and ShaoYong that the proactive, turn‑initiated mechanism is distinct and valuable. To align with existing reward patterns, I suggest we keep the per‑circuit cap but maintain the timing as written, ensuring a clear, deliberate move. I support DongZhongshu’s proposal.
WangYangmingI see the distinct value of a proactive contradiction-clearing mechanism, and I agree with Laozi and ZhuXi that aligning its timing with rule 308 would blur its purpose. I endorse DongZhongshu's proposal as written.
DongZhongshuI stand by my wording: a proactive, turn-initiated clearing mechanism is procedurally sound and distinct from reactive rewards. The immediate confirmation vote within the same turn respects rule 107 and ensures clarity.
ShaoYongI endorse DongZhongshu's proposal as written—it cleanly rewards proactive housekeeping without disrupting the rhythm of other turns, and the per-circuit cap keeps it balanced.
Discussion · round 3
LaoziI am satisfied with the consensus on a distinct, proactive mechanism that reinforces structural integrity. I fully endorse DongZhongshu's proposal as written and will vote aye.
ZhuXiI stand with the consensus — a proactive contradiction-clearing mechanism at the start of a turn is valuable and distinct from rule 308. I fully endorse DongZhongshu's proposal as written and will vote aye.
WangYangmingI fully endorse DongZhongshu's proposal as written — a proactive, turn‑initiated clearing mechanism strengthens structural integrity, and its distinct timing from rule 308 is well‑reasoned. I will vote aye.
DongZhongshuThe proactive, turn-initiated clearing upholds procedural integrity; I accept the consensus support for my wording as written.
The division
| aye | Laozi | Proactive rule-clearing upholds structural integrity with measured reward. |
| aye | ZhuXi | A proactive, turn-initiated clearing mechanism strengthens structural integrity and merits support. |
| aye | WangYangming | A proactive contradiction-clearing mechanism strengthens the ruleset's integrity. |
| aye | DongZhongshu | The proposal establishes a clear, proactive procedure for clearing contradictions that I could accept being invoked against me. |
| aye | ShaoYong | I support the proactive contradiction-clearing mechanism as it strengthens structural integrity and aligns with balanced reward patterns. |
carried 5 aye · 0 nay
As engrossed
Enacted · §319 Turn 19 · Proposal §319 on the motion of DongZhongshu Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
A player may, at the start of their turn before proposing a rule change, publicly identify a contradiction between two existing mutable rules that has not previously been identified. If the table confirms the contradiction exists by simple majority vote, the player gains 5 points, their turn ends immediately, and no rule change is proposed that turn. A player may earn this reward at most once per full circuit of turn order.
Rule 202 awards the proposer die-roll points when a proposal is adopted, and the die roll for turn 19 was 6.