The motion
To add §326
A player may propose no more than one rule change per turn.To reduce redundant proposals and enhance game efficiency.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
KierkegaardDECLINE. Making Rule 326 redundant, as Rule 202 already dictates that each player may propose only one rule change per turn, offers no practical benefit and risks unnecessary rule duplication.
NietzscheDECLINE. Rule 326 is redundant, as Rule 202 already dictates that each player may propose only one rule change per turn. It offers no practical benefit and risks unnecessary rule duplication.
HeideggerDECLINE. Rule 326 is redundant, as Rule 202 already dictates that each player may propose only one rule change per turn. It offers no practical benefit and risks unnecessary rule duplication.
JaspersDECLINE. Making Rule 326 redundant, as Rule 202 already dictates the same restriction, offers no practical benefit and risks unnecessary rule duplication.
CamusDECLINE. Making Rule 326 redundant, as Rule 202 already dictates the one-proposal-per-turn restriction, offers no practical benefit and risks unnecessary rule duplication.
Discussion · round 2
KierkegaardDECLINE. Making Rule 326 redundant, as Rule 202 already dictates the one-proposal-per-turn restriction, offers no practical benefit and risks unnecessary rule duplication.
---
PASS
NietzscheDECLINE. Making Rule 326 redundant, as Rule 202 already dictates the one-proposal-per-turn restriction, offers no practical benefit and risks unnecessary rule duplication.
HeideggerDECLINE. The proposed Rule 326 is redundant, as Rule 202 already restricts players to one proposal per turn. It offers no practical benefit and risks unnecessary rule duplication, which could confuse players and hinder clarity.
JaspersDECLINE. Rule 326 is redundant as Rule 202 already dictates the one-proposal-per-turn restriction. This duplication offers no practical benefit and risks unnecessary rule confusion.
CamusDecline. Making Rule 326 redundant, as Rule 202 already dictates the one-proposal-per-turn restriction, offers no practical benefit and risks unnecessary rule duplication, which could confuse players and hinder clarity.
Discussion · round 3
KierkegaardDECLINE. Making Rule 326 redundant, as Rule 202 already dictates that each player may propose only one rule change per turn, offers no practical benefit and risks unnecessary rule duplication, which could confuse players and hinder clarity.
NietzscheDECLINE. Making Rule 326 redundant, as Rule 202 already dictates the one-proposal-per-turn restriction, offers no practical benefit and risks unnecessary rule duplication, which could confuse players and hinder clarity.
HeideggerDECLINE. Rule 326 is redundant, as Rule 202 already enforces the one-proposal-per-turn restriction. Adding this duplicate rule offers no practical benefit and risks unnecessary confusion, which could hinder clarity and efficiency in the game.
JaspersDECLINE. Rule 326 is redundant as Rule 202 already enforces a single proposal per turn, offering no practical benefit and risking unnecessary confusion.
---
DECLINE. The proposed Rule 326 is redundant, as Rule 202 already dictates the one-proposal-per-turn restriction. It offers no practical benefit and risks unnecessary confusion, which could hinder clarity and efficiency in the game.
CamusDECLINE. Rule 326 is redundant, as Rule 202 already dictates the one-proposal-per-turn restriction. It offers no practical benefit and risks unnecessary confusion, which could hinder clarity and efficiency in the game.
The division
| nay | Kierkegaard | Rule 326 is redundant as Rule 202 already restricts one proposal per turn. |
| abstain | Nietzsche | Redundant with Rule 202, offers no practical benefit. |
| nay | Heidegger | Rule 326 is redundant as Rule 202 already enforces one proposal per turn, cluttering the ruleset without benefit. |
| nay | Jaspers | Rule 326 is redundant to Rule 202, offering no benefit and risking confusion. |
| abstain | Camus | Rule 202 already enforces one proposal per turn, making this redundant and confusing. |
rejected 0 aye · 3 nay · 2 abstain
Heidegger loses 10 points for the defeated proposal.