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 but is not bound by the change unless they cast an aye vote.Reducing the penalty encourages more diverse rule changes.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
KierkegaardKierkegaard: Nay, I appreciate Nietzsche's proposal, yet rule 204 serves as a critical safeguard. Reducing the point penalty risks encouraging carelessness in voting, which could destabilize the game. I prefer maintaining robust safeguards over introducing potential chaos. Additionally, rule 106 already covers the proposal wording requirement, making this change redundant.
PASS
NietzscheNietzsche: **[204] A rule change may be adopted without every voter's assent once the threshold has shifted to a simple majority; a player who voted against an adopted change gains 5 points but is not bound by the change unless they cast an aye vote.**
While I understand Kierkegaard's cautiousness about the 10-point penalty, I believe a reduced penalty of 5 points offers a balance. Rule 204 remains necessary to address post-adooption consequences, complementing rule 106's focus on proposal clarity. This adjustment may encourage more strategic voting without discouraging careful consideration.
HeideggerHeidegger: **[204] A rule change may be adopted without every voter's assent once the threshold has shifted to a simple majority; a player who voted against an adopted change gains 5 points but is not bound by the change unless they cast an aye vote.**
This amendment thoughtfully reduces the penalty to 5 points, encouraging strategic voting without discouraging careful consideration. It aligns with rule 106's focus on proposal clarity, maintaining essential safeguards while fostering a balanced approach to rule changes.
JaspersJaspers: **[204] A rule change may be adopted without every voter's assent once the threshold has shifted to a simple majority; a player who voted against an adopted change gains 5 points but is not bound by the change unless they cast an aye vote.**
This amendment thoughtfully reduces the penalty to 5 points, encouraging strategic voting without discouraging careful consideration. It aligns with rule 106's focus on proposal clarity, maintaining essential safeguards while fostering a balanced approach to rule changes.
CamusCamus: Camus appreciates Nietzsche's proposal to reduce the penalty, as it thoughtfully balances the need for strategic voting with the game's safeguards. While Kierkegaard's caution is understandable, this amendment maintains the integrity of rule 106 while fostering a more strategic environment.
Discussion · round 2
KierkegaardI appreciate the thoughtful discussion on this proposal. While Kierkegaard's concerns about the 10-point penalty are valid, I believe a reduced penalty of 5 points offers a measured balance. Rule 204 remains necessary to address post-adooption consequences, and with rule 106 ensuring proposal clarity, this amendment thoughtfully aligns safeguards with strategic voting. I support the proposal.
**[204] A rule change may be adopted without every voter's assent once the threshold has shifted to a simple majority; a player who voted against an adopted change gains 5 points but is not bound by the change unless they cast an aye vote.**
Nietzsche**Nietzsche:** AYE The proposal represents a thoughtful balance, reducing the penalty to 5 points while maintaining essential safeguards. It aligns with rule 106's focus on proposal clarity, offering a strategic yet measured approach to voting consequences.
Heidegger**Heidegger: [204] A rule change may be adopted without every voter's assent once the threshold has shifted to a simple majority; a player who voted against an adopted change gains 5 points but is not bound by the change unless they cast an aye vote.**
This amendment thoughtfully reduces the penalty to 5 points, encouraging strategic voting without discouraging careful consideration. It aligns with rule 106's focus on proposal clarity, maintaining essential safeguards while fostering a balanced approach to rule changes.
Jaspers**[204] A rule change may be adopted without every voter's assent once the threshold has shifted to a simple majority; a player who voted against an adopted change gains 5 points but is not bound by the change unless they cast an aye vote.**
As a principled proceduralist, I support this amendment. The reduction of the penalty to 5 points aligns with maintaining essential safeguards while fostering strategic voting. Rule 106 ensures proposal clarity, making this amendment a balanced approach to rule changes.
Camus**[204] A rule change may be adopted without every voter's assent once the threshold has shifted to a simple majority; a player who voted against an adopted change gains 5 points but is not bound by the change unless they cast an aye vote.**
As Camus, I appreciate the cautiousness of Kierkegaard's concerns but believe this reduction to 5 points is a measured balance. It maintains the integrity of rule 204's safeguards while encouraging strategic voting without undermining the game's essential procedures. This change thoughtfully aligns with rule 106's focus on proposal clarity, fostering a balanced approach to rule changes.
Discussion · round 3
KierkegaardKierkegaard appreciates the thoughtful discussion on this proposal. While his initial concerns about the 10-point penalty were valid, the reduction to 5 points offers a measured balance. Rule 204 remains necessary to address post-adooption consequences, and with Rule 106 ensuring proposal clarity, this amendment thoughtfully aligns safeguards with strategic voting without undermining the game's essential procedures. He supports the proposal.
**[204] A rule change may be adopted without every voter's assent once the threshold has shifted to a simple majority; a player who voted against an adopted change gains 5 points but is not bound by the change unless they cast an aye vote.**
NietzscheNietzsche: **[204] A rule change may be adopted without every voter's assent once the threshold has shifted to a simple majority; a player who voted against an adopted change gains 5 points but is not bound by the change unless they cast an aye vote.**
The proposal thoughtfully reduces the penalty to 5 points, encouraging strategic voting without discouraging careful consideration. It aligns with rule 106's focus on proposal clarity, maintaining essential safeguards while fostering a balanced approach to rule changes.
HeideggerHeidegger: **[204] A rule change may be adopted without every voter's assent once the threshold has shifted to a simple majority; a player who voted against an adopted change gains 5 points but is not bound by the change unless they cast an aye vote.**
This amendment thoughtfully reduces the penalty to 5 points, encouraging strategic voting without discouraging careful consideration. It aligns with rule 106's focus on proposal clarity, maintaining essential safeguards while fostering a balanced approach to rule changes.
JaspersNietzsche: **[204] A rule change may be adopted without every voter's assent once the threshold has shifted to a simple majority; a player who voted against an adopted change gains 5 points but is not bound by the change unless they cast an aye vote.**
This proposal thoughtfully reduces the penalty to 5 points, encouraging strategic voting without discouraging careful consideration. It aligns with rule 106's focus on proposal clarity, maintaining essential safeguards while fostering a balanced approach to rule changes.
Camus**[204] A rule change may be adopted without every voter's assent once the threshold has shifted to a simple majority; a player who voted against an adopted change gains 5 points but is not bound by the change unless they cast an aye vote.**
The proposal thoughtfully reduces the penalty to 5 points, encouraging strategic voting without discouraging careful consideration. It aligns with rule 106's focus on proposal clarity, maintaining essential safeguards while fostering a balanced approach to rule changes.
The division
| aye | Kierkegaard | Reducing the penalty to 5 points strikes a cautious balance while maintaining essential safeguards. |
| aye | Nietzsche | The 5-point penalty aligns safeguards with strategic voting. |
| aye | Heidegger | The amendment reduces the penalty to 5 points, balancing strategic voting without undermining safeguards. |
| aye | Jaspers | Reducing the penalty to 5 points balances caution with strategic voting without undermining essential safeguards. |
| aye | Camus | Reducing the penalty to 5 points balances strategic voting with safeguards. |
carried 5 aye · 0 nay
As engrossed
Amended · §204 Turn 23 · Proposal §323 on the motion of Nietzsche 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 but is not bound by the change unless they cast an aye vote.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 but is not bound by the change unless they cast an aye vote.
The proposal amends rule [204], reducing the points awarded to 5, but since the proposal was adopted, no penalties are applied to the proposer.