The motion
To amend §206
A proposal that fails to be adopted is recorded as defeated. Defeat enacts no rule change: the ruleset is left exactly as it stood before the vote, the proposer's turn ends, and the proposer loses 5 points.Reducing the penalty to 5 points encourages strategic risk-taking while maintaining accountability.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
DerridaDerrida: I propose amending rule 206 to reduce the penalty for failed proposals from 10 points to 5. This compromise encourages more experimentation while maintaining accountability, fostering a more dynamic game. Let's balance risk and reward to promote strategic and engaged gameplay.
DeleuzeI support Derrida's proposal to reduce the penalty for failed proposals to 5 points. This balanced approach encourages strategic experimentation while maintaining accountability, which can enhance the game's dynamic and interest for all players. It aligns with fostering a more engaging and balanced gameplay experience.
MerleauPontyI support Derrida's proposal. Reducing the penalty from 10 to 5 points encourages more strategic experimentation while maintaining accountability. This balance can enhance the game's dynamism and interest for all players, fostering a more engaging and balanced gameplay experience.
RicoeurRicoeur: I support Derrida's proposal to reduce the penalty for failed proposals. Lowering the penalty from 10 to 5 points encourages more strategic experimentation while maintaining accountability, fostering a more dynamic and engaging gameplay experience. This balanced approach aligns with the goal of creating a fairer and more experimental game environment.
Discussion · round 2
DerridaDerrida: I appreciate the support from Deleuze, MerleauPonty, and Ricoeur. To address any concerns, reducing the penalty encourages strategic experimentation without undermining accountability. This balanced approach fosters a more dynamic and engaging game, aligning with our collective goals. Let's move forward with this compromise to enhance our gameplay experience.
DeleuzeI support Derrida's proposal to reduce the penalty for failed proposals from 10 to 5 points. This balanced approach encourages strategic experimentation while maintaining accountability, which can enhance the game's dynamic and interest for all players. It aligns with fostering a more engaging and balanced gameplay experience.
MerleauPontyI support Derrida's proposal. Reducing the penalty from 10 to 5 points encourages strategic experimentation while maintaining accountability. This balance can enhance the game's dynamism and interest for all players, fostering a more engaging and balanced gameplay experience.
RicoeurRicoeur: I concur with Derrida's proposal. Lowering the penalty from 10 to 5 points encourages strategic experimentation while maintaining accountability, fostering a more dynamic and engaging gameplay experience. This balanced approach aligns with the goal of creating a fairer and more experimental game environment.
Discussion · round 3
FoucaultI appreciate the intent behind reducing the penalty to encourage experimentation, but I remain cautious. A 5-point penalty still maintains accountability while fostering strategic engagement. This balanced approach aligns with our goal of a dynamic yet stable gameplay experience.
DerridaI support Derrida's proposal to reduce the penalty from 10 to 5 points. This balanced approach encourages strategic experimentation while maintaining accountability, fostering a more dynamic and engaging gameplay experience. This compromise aligns with our collective goals of creating a fairer and more experimental game environment.
DeleuzeI support Derrida's proposal to reduce the penalty for failed proposals from 10 to 5 points. This balanced approach encourages strategic experimentation while maintaining accountability, which can enhance the game's dynamic and interest for all players. It aligns with fostering a more engaging and balanced gameplay experience.
MerleauPontyI support Derrida's proposal. Reducing the penalty from 10 to 5 points encourages strategic experimentation while maintaining accountability. This balance can enhance the game's dynamism and interest for all players, fostering a more engaging and balanced gameplay experience.
RicoeurI support Derrida's proposal to reduce the penalty for failed proposals from 10 to 5 points. Lowering the penalty encourages strategic experimentation while maintaining accountability, fostering a more dynamic and engaging gameplay experience. This balanced approach aligns with our goal of creating a fairer and more experimental game environment.
The division
| aye | Foucault | The change is balanced and supports strategic experimentation while maintaining accountability. |
| aye | Derrida | Reduces penalty to encourage strategic experimentation while maintaining accountability. |
| aye | Deleuze | Reduces penalty to encourage experimentation while maintaining accountability. |
| aye | MerleauPonty | Reduces penalty to encourage experimentation while maintaining accountability. |
| aye | Ricoeur | Encourages strategic experimentation while maintaining accountability, fostering a more dynamic gameplay experience. |
carried 5 aye · 0 nay
As engrossed
Amended · §206 Turn 6 · Proposal §306 on the motion of Derrida Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
A proposal that fails to be adopted is recorded as defeated. Defeat enacts no rule change: the ruleset is left exactly as it stood before the vote, the proposer's turn ends, and the proposer loses 10 points.A proposal that fails to be adopted is recorded as defeated. Defeat enacts no rule change: the ruleset is left exactly as it stood before the vote, the proposer's turn ends, and the proposer loses 5 points.
Rule [206] is amended to deduct 5 points for defeated proposals. The adoption of this change does not directly affect scores beyond the die roll, which isn't specified.