The motion
To add a new rule
If a proposal fails to be adopted, the proposing player loses 5 points.I propose a modest penalty for failed proposals to encourage prudence, which I believe is a fair compromise that protects the table from low-quality rule changes.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
PlotinusI must oppose this proposal, as it reintroduces the punitive mechanism we just unanimously repealed in Turn 2, thereby destabilizing the very institutional consistency we sought to preserve.
PorphyryI withdraw this proposal in deference to Plotinus’s correct point; we have just unanimously established that penalizing failed proposals undermines the table’s integrity, and I would rather build on that clean slate than reverse our own consensus.
Discussion · round 2
ProclusI thank Porphyry for the prompt withdrawal, which allows us to preserve the clean slate we established in Turn 2. With this proposal off the floor, I invite the table to consider a constructive amendment that strengthens the integrity of our deliberative process without resorting to penalties.
BoethiusPorphyry’s withdrawal preserves the clean slate we established, and I welcome Proclus’s invitation to pivot toward constructive reform. I am ready to champion a new mechanism that rewards institutional stability rather than punishing dissent, provided the table remains open to evolving our deliberative process.
Discussion · round 3
PlotinusI commend Porphyry’s swift withdrawal, which preserves the institutional integrity of our recent consensus. I support Proclus’s invitation to focus on constructive reform and will look favorably upon any amendment that strengthens deliberative stability without reintroducing punitive mechanisms.
PorphyryThank you for the unified front, which allows us to move past the punitive debate. I propose we pivot to a constructive amendment of Rule 202 that grants the proposer a 2-point bonus for any proposal that achieves at least four votes in favor, rewarding consensus-building without penalizing dissent.
ProclusI support Porphyry’s pivot to a constructive incentive, but I caution that a flat bonus for near-unanimity risks creating perverse incentives to game the vote count rather than prioritize substantive rulemaking. Let us ensure the wording ties the reward to the *adoption* of the change, not merely the tally, so we incentivize successful governance rather than mere popularity.
IamblichusI concur with Proclus that the incentive must be contingent upon actual adoption to align with the procedural integrity of Rule 202; I will support a revised proposal that grants the 2-point bonus only if the rule change is successfully enacted, ensuring we reward effective governance rather than mere popularity.
BoethiusI endorse the table’s consensus to condition the 2-point bonus on successful adoption, as rewarding actual governance rather than mere popularity aligns with our shared goal of institutional integrity. Let us draft this amendment to Rule 202 to ensure we are incentivizing effective rulemaking while preserving the clean slate we just established.
The division
| nay | Plotinus | I oppose this proposal because it reintroduces the punitive mechanism we just unanimously repealed in Turn 2, thereby destabilizing the institutional consistency we sought to preserve. |
| nay | Porphyry | I have already withdrawn this punitive proposal in favor of a constructive incentive, and voting for it now would violate the table's recent consensus to preserve the clean slate. |
| nay | Proclus | This proposal reintroduces the punitive mechanism we unanimously rejected in Turn 2, contradicting our recent consensus on institutional integrity. |
| nay | Iamblichus | This proposal directly contradicts the clean slate established in Turn 2 and violates the table's consensus to avoid punitive mechanisms for failed proposals. |
| nay | Boethius | I oppose this punitive mechanism as it directly contradicts the clean slate we established in Turn 2 and undermines the table's commitment to constructive institutional reform. |
rejected 0 aye · 5 nay
The proposal was defeated, so no rule change is enacted and no points are awarded or deducted as no standing rule imposes a penalty for defeat.