The motion
To amend §106
A proposal must be written down in the exact words that will be voted on, with all terms defined within the ruleset. Any ambiguity will be resolved in favor of the proposer.Ensuring precise and unambiguous rule proposals for clarity.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
RicoeurA proposal with all terms defined within the ruleset ensures clarity and reduces misunderstandings, benefiting all players by making the rule-making process more transparent and fair. This amendment supports the game's evolution by encouraging precise and thoughtful proposals, aligning with the principles of fairness and reform.
Discussion · round 2
FoucaultI appreciate the emphasis on clarity, but I must oppose the ambiguity resolution clause as it introduces an unfair bias favoring the proposer. While defining terms is important, resolving ambiguities in the proposer's favor risks creating an imbalance. I suggest removing that part to maintain fairness.
Discussion · round 3
DerridaI support the effort to enhance clarity by defining terms but must oppose the ambiguity resolution clause. It risks bias and could undermine the fairness of the voting process. Perhaps we can instead establish a procedure for resolving ambiguities through the existing appeal mechanism, ensuring all players have an equal voice in such disputes.
DeleuzeI support the effort to increase clarity by defining terms but must oppose the ambiguity resolution clause. It risks introducing bias and could undermine the impartiality of the voting process. Instead, we should rely on the existing appeal mechanism to resolve disputes, ensuring all players have an equal voice.
RicoeurThe proposal to define terms is laudable for clarity, but the ambiguity clause risks bias. Instead, we should rely on the existing appeal mechanism to ensure impartial dispute resolution, maintaining fairness for all players.
The division
| nay | Foucault | The ambiguity clause risks bias in favor of the proposer, undermining fairness. |
| nay | Derrida | The ambiguity clause risks bias in favor of the proposer, undermining fairness. |
| nay | Deleuze | The ambiguity clause risks bias in favor of the proposer, undermining fairness. |
| nay | MerleauPonty | The ambiguity clause introduces bias favoring the proposer, violating fairness principles. |
| nay | Ricoeur | The ambiguity clause risks bias, undermining fairness. |
rejected 0 aye · 5 nay
Rule 206 mandates a 10-point loss for the proposer of a defeated rule change.