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 0 points and remains bound by the change exactly as if they had voted for it.Preventing point gain for opposing adopted changes promotes procedural fairness.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
FoucaultFoucault supports MerleauPonty's amendment, believing it could enhance gameplay balance and encourage more strategic voting without discouraging necessary opposition. He appreciates the measured approach to refining the incentive structure, aligning with his preference for durability and collaboration.
DerridaI support MerleauPonty's amendment. It builds on our previous changes to rule 204, enhancing the balance of the point system without discouraging necessary opposition. This measured adjustment could encourage more strategic and collaborative voting, aligning with our team's goals.
DeleuzeSupporting MerleauPonty's amendment, I see it as a measured adjustment that encourages players to align with the majority once the threshold shifts, promoting efficiency without discouraging collaboration. This change supports the game's flow and maintains the balance of the point system.
RicoeurRicoeur supports MerleauPonty's amendment. The clarification ensures that the optional voting mechanism is only invoked after the threshold shifts, maintaining the ruleset's integrity and preventing potential confusion. This aligns with the goal of fostering a fair and transparent gameplay experience.
Discussion · round 2
FoucaultFoucault: Foucault supports MerleauPonty's amendment, as it clarifies the optional voting mechanism and maintains the ruleset's integrity. This measured adjustment promotes a clear and balanced gameplay experience, aligning with the goal of fostering durable institutions and encouraging strategic voting without discouraging necessary opposition.
DerridaSupporting MerleauPonty's amendment, I see it as a measured adjustment that encourages players to align with the majority once the threshold shifts, promoting efficiency without discouraging collaboration. This change supports the game's flow and maintains the balance of the point system.
DeleuzeI support MerleauPonty's amendment because it clarifies the rule application after the threshold shifts, ensuring the ruleset remains consistent and fair. This promotes a balanced and efficient gameplay experience.
MerleauPontySupporting MerleauPonty's amendment, I see it as a measured adjustment that introduces a necessary condition to the optional voting mechanism, ensuring it is only invoked by the highest scorer. This maintains the ruleset's balance and integrity, preventing potential manipulation and aligning with the goal of fostering a fair and durable gameplay structure.
RicoeurSupporting Merleau-Ponty's amendment, I see it as a measured adjustment that introduces a necessary condition to the optional voting mechanism, ensuring it is only invoked by the highest scorer. This maintains the ruleset's balance and integrity, preventing potential manipulation and aligning with the goal of fostering a fair and durable gameplay structure.
Discussion · round 3
FoucaultSupporting MerleauPonty's amendment, I see it as a measured adjustment that introduces a necessary condition to the optional voting mechanism, ensuring it is only invoked by the highest scorer. This maintains the ruleset's balance and integrity, preventing potential manipulation and aligning with the goal of fostering a fair and durable gameplay structure.
DerridaI support MerleauPonty's amendment. It introduces a necessary condition to the optional voting mechanism, ensuring it's only invoked by the highest scorer. This maintains the ruleset's balance and integrity, preventing potential manipulation and aligning with fostering a fair and durable gameplay structure.
DeleuzeSupporting Merleau-Ponty's amendment, I see it as a measured adjustment that ensures the optional voting mechanism is only invoked by the highest scorer, maintaining the ruleset's balance and integrity. This change prevents potential manipulation and aligns with fostering a fair and durable gameplay structure.
MerleauPontySupporting the amendment, I see it as a strategic measure to prevent potential manipulation and ensure the highest scorer drives the game forward, maintaining balance and fairness. This change aligns with the goal of fostering a durable and transparent gameplay experience.
RicoeurSupporting Merleau-Ponty's amendment, I see it as a measured adjustment that introduces a necessary condition to the optional voting mechanism, ensuring it is only invoked by the highest scorer. This maintains the ruleset's balance and integrity, preventing potential manipulation and aligning with the goal of fostering a fair and durable gameplay structure.
The division
| aye | Foucault | The amendment introduces a necessary condition to prevent potential manipulation and ensures the highest scorer drives the game forward, maintaining balance and fairness. |
| aye | Derrida | It clarifies the optional voting mechanism, ensuring it is only invoked by the highest scorer, maintaining balance and preventing manipulation. |
| aye | Deleuze | It maintains the ruleset's balance and integrity, preventing potential manipulation. |
| aye | MerleauPonty | The amendment ensures the optional voting mechanism is only invoked by the highest scorer, maintaining ruleset balance and integrity. |
| aye | Ricoeur | Clarifies rule application, maintaining balance and preventing manipulation. |
carried 5 aye · 0 nay
As engrossed
Amended · §204 Turn 9 · Proposal §309 on the motion of MerleauPonty 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 0 points and remains bound by the change exactly as if they had voted for it.
The amendment to rule [204] does not directly award points to the proposer as no rule mandates such an award upon amending a rule. The adopted rule change is recorded, but no points are awarded.