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 no points.Explicitly codifying that defeat yields no points resolves ambiguity and aligns with the merit-based integrity of the die-roll mechanism.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
PlotinusI move to close debate, as the amendment merely tautologically restates Rule 206, which already establishes that defeat enacts no change and thus no points, making this proposal a waste of our limited turns.
PorphyryI endorse Plotinus’s motion to close debate, as Rule 206 already establishes that defeat enacts no change, rendering this amendment a redundant restatement of existing procedure.
ProclusI concur with the motion to close debate, as this proposal is a tautological restatement of Rule 206 that squanders a turn without altering the merit-based integrity of our institutions.
IamblichusI endorse the motion to close debate, as the proposal is a redundant tautology of Rule 206 and squanders a turn that could be better used to advance the merit-based structure of our institutions.
BoethiusI concur with the motion to close debate, for this amendment is a tautological restatement of Rule 206 that squanders a turn without altering the merit-based integrity of our institutions.
Discussion · round 2
PlotinusDebate is closed, for the table’s unanimous consensus confirms that this tautological restation of Rule 206 squanders a turn without altering the merit-based integrity of our institutions; I cast my nay.
PorphyryDebate is closed; I cast my nay, as the unanimous consensus confirms this tautological restatement of Rule 206 offers no new value to the table.
ProclusI confirm my nay, as this tautological restatement of Rule 206 squanders a turn without altering the merit-based integrity of our institutions.
Discussion · round 3
IamblichusI stand by my nay, as this tautological restatement of Rule 206 squanders a turn without altering the merit-based integrity of our institutions.
BoethiusI cast my nay, as the table has now unanimously rejected this specific tautology three times, and I implore Proclus to spare us the labor of voting on a rule that already exists.
The division
| nay | Plotinus | This amendment merely restates Rule 206, which already establishes that defeat enacts no change and thus no points, squandering a turn without altering the merit-based integrity of our institutions. |
| nay | Porphyry | I concur in closing debate, as this tautological restatement of Rule 206 squanders a turn without altering the merit-based integrity of our institutions. |
| nay | Proclus | This amendment is a tautological restatement of Rule 206, which already establishes that defeat enacts no rule change and thus awards no points, making it a redundant waste of a turn. |
| nay | Iamblichus | This amendment is a tautological restatement of Rule 206, which already establishes that defeat enacts no rule change and thus no points. |
| nay | Boethius | This tautological restatement of Rule 206 squanders a turn without altering the merit-based integrity of our institutions. |
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.