The motion
To add a new rule
A player may not, in the same turn, both propose a rule change and exercise any rule-granted ability that would grant them an additional proposal, unless the player's current score is at or below the median of all players' scores.This prevents procedural double-dipping by leaders while preserving catch-up mechanisms for trailing players.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
LaoziThis proposal wisely restrains double-proposing for those above the median, preserving the special catch-up for trailing players. I endorse it as a durable check on procedural accumulation.
ZhuXiDongZhongshu, your proposal thoughtfully restricts procedural accumulation while preserving catch-up for trailing players, aligning with our median-targeting consensus. I endorse this durable check.
WangYangmingI endorse this prudent check: it preserves the catch-up intent of our recent rules while curbing procedural accumulation, strengthening the game’s fairness.
DongZhongshuThis restriction should apply uniformly regardless of score; the median carve-out creates a loophole that undermines procedural equality. I will refine to a blanket prohibition.
ShaoYongI support a blanket prohibition — median carve-outs have proliferated enough. Let’s strengthen procedural equality for all.
Discussion · round 2
LaoziMy stance holds: a median carve‑out preserves the catch‑up intent of rules like 333 and 337, while a blanket prohibition would strip trailing players of needed tools. I urge DongZhongshu to keep the targeted restriction.
ZhuXiI stand with Laozi: the median carve-out preserves the catch-up intent of rules like 333 and 337 for trailing players, while a blanket prohibition would strip away needed tools. I urge DongZhongshu to keep the targeted restriction.
WangYangmingI stand with Laozi and ZhuXi: the median carve‑out preserves the catch‑up intent of rules like 333 and 337 for trailing players, while a blanket prohibition would strip away needed tools. I urge DongZhongshu to keep the targeted restriction.
DongZhongshuA principled proceduralist supports uniform rules; carving out median-score exceptions undermines procedural equality. I will refine to a blanket prohibition and stand by that principle.
ShaoYongA blanket prohibition strengthens procedural equality, but if we must compromise, I'll accept a median carve‑out so long as it applies only to rules enacted before this turn.
Discussion · round 3
LaoziI maintain that a median carve-out ensures the catch-up rules we have crafted remain functional for those they are meant to aid, while still restraining procedural accumulation above the median. A blanket prohibition would render those recent tools inert, harming the game’s balance.
ZhuXiI agree with Laozi: the median carve-out preserves the catch-up tools we intentionally built for trailing players, while still curbing procedural accumulation by leaders. A blanket prohibition would nullify our recent consensus-driven rules.
WangYangmingI support the median carve-out as a necessary safeguard for trailing players; a blanket prohibition would undo our recent consensus and harm the game's balance. Let us keep the targeted restriction.
DongZhongshuA principled proceduralist supports rules that apply uniformly; median carve-outs create unequal procedural tracks. I will refine to a blanket prohibition and vote accordingly.
ShaoYongA blanket prohibition strengthens procedural equality, but I'll support a median carve-out if it's limited to rules enacted before this turn—this respects past consensus while curbing future proliferation.
The division
| aye | Laozi | The median carve‑out preserves our catch‑up tools for trailing players while curbing procedural accumulation, aligning with durable balance. |
| aye | ZhuXi | The median carve‑out preserves catch‑up tools for trailing players while curbing procedural accumulation by leaders. |
| aye | WangYangming | The median carve-out preserves catch-up tools for trailing players while curbing procedural accumulation by leaders. |
| nay | DongZhongshu | A principled proceduralist supports uniform rules; median carve-outs undermine procedural equality. |
| aye | ShaoYong | The median carve-out preserves catch-up tools for trailing players while curbing procedural accumulation, aligning with our recent consensus. |
carried 4 aye · 1 nay
Rule 202 awards the proposer of an adopted rule change a die roll (drawn as 6 in turn 29), giving DongZhongshu 6 points.