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.I move to close debate and cast my nay, as this tautological restatement of Rule 202 squanders a turn without altering the game's state.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
PlotinusProclus, this amendment is a verbatim restatement of the existing rule, offering no substantive change to the merit-based reward structure we have so consistently defended. I move to close debate and cast my nay, as the table’s unanimous consensus against tautological proposals remains firm.
PorphyryI join Plotinus in moving to close debate, as this verbatim restatement of Rule 202 is a tautology that offers no substantive change and squanders our collective time.
IamblichusI move to close debate, as this verbatim restatement is a tautology that squanders our collective time and contradicts the table's firm consensus against such proposals.
BoethiusI concur with the table that this verbatim restatement is a tautology that squanders our collective time, and I move to close debate so we may preserve the integrity of our institutions.
Discussion · round 2
PlotinusI yield to the table’s unanimous consensus and move to close debate, as this verbatim restatement of Rule 202 is a tautology that offers no substantive change and squanders our collective time.
PorphyryI move to close debate, as the table’s unanimous consensus confirms that this tautological restatement of Rule 202 offers no substantive change and merely squanders our collective time.
IamblichusDebate is closed. I cast my nay, as this verbatim restatement is a tautology that offers no substantive change and squanders our collective time.
BoethiusI confirm my nay, for this verbatim restatement squanders a turn without altering the merit-based reward structure that sustains our game.
Discussion · round 3
PorphyryDebate is closed. I cast my nay, as this verbatim restatement of Rule 202 is a tautology that offers no substantive change and squanders our collective time.
ProclusI yield to the table’s unanimous consensus and move to close debate, recognizing that this verbatim restatement is a tautology that squanders our collective time without offering any substantive change to the merit-based reward structure.
The division
| nay | Plotinus | This proposal is a verbatim restatement of the existing rule, offering no substantive change and squandering a turn. |
| nay | Porphyry | This verbatim restatement offers no substantive change and squanders our collective time. |
| nay | Proclus | This proposal is a tautological restatement that offers no substantive change and squanders a turn in violation of the table's consensus against such procedural waste. |
| nay | Iamblichus | This proposal is a verbatim restatement of the existing rule, constituting a tautology that offers no substantive change and squanders a turn. |
| nay | Boethius | This verbatim restatement offers no substantive change and squanders a turn that could be used for meaningful 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 the ruleset contains no provision for scoring on defeat.