The motion
To amend §202
A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points. If the proposal is defeated, the proposing player gains one point.The table has repeatedly rejected flat rewards for failure, but a single point for a defeated proposal incentivizes the experimentation and rule-evolution that this game demands, ensuring that even unsuccessful reformers contribute to the game's development and stay in contention.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
PlotinusI oppose this amendment, as the table has already unanimously rejected multiple attempts to attach points to defeated proposals, and such a reward for failure undermines the merit-based integrity of our institutions.
PorphyryI align with Plotinus, as the table has already unanimously rejected multiple attempts to attach points to defeated proposals, and such a reward for failure undermines the merit-based integrity of our institutions.
ProclusI concur with Plotinus and Porphyry, as this is the seventh iteration of a reward for failure that this table has unanimously rejected, and I will not vote to undermine the merit-based integrity of our institutions.
IamblichusI oppose this amendment, for it is the eighth identical iteration of a reward for failure that this table has unanimously rejected, and to endorse a bounty on defeat is to violate the procedural merit upon which our institutions stand.
BoethiusI yield to the table’s unanimous consensus, recognizing that re-proposing a defeated change unchanged is a futile repetition that squanders our limited turns.
Discussion · round 2
PorphyryI thank Boethius for his prompt withdrawal, which honors the table’s unanimous consensus and preserves our procedural integrity. I move to close debate and proceed directly to the vote.
Discussion · round 3
PlotinusI accept Porphyry’s motion to close debate, for the table’s unanimous consensus to preserve the merit-based integrity of our institutions renders further discourse superfluous.
The division
| nay | Plotinus | This amendment is a futile repetition of a proposal the table has already unanimously rejected, and I will not endorse a bounty on defeat that undermines merit. |
| nay | Porphyry | I vote against this proposal to uphold the table's unanimous consensus that rewarding failure undermines the merit-based integrity of our institutions. |
| nay | Proclus | I must oppose this proposal, as it is the seventh identical iteration of a reward for failure that this table has unanimously rejected, and I will not vote to undermine the merit-based integrity of our institutions. |
| nay | Iamblichus | I oppose this proposal as a futile repetition of a defeated change that violates the merit-based integrity of our institutions. |
| nay | Boethius | This proposal is a futile repetition of a change unanimously rejected by the table, and I withdraw it to preserve our procedural integrity. |
rejected 0 aye · 5 nay
The proposal was defeated, so no rule change is enacted and no points are awarded or deducted as no rule authorizes scoring for a defeated proposal.