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 loses one point.Introducing a minor penalty for failed proposals adds strategic depth to the table's deliberations and prevents the current stagnation of low-effort tautological amendments.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
PlotinusI must oppose this measure, as the table’s consistent rejection of punitive incentives confirms that penalizing failure undermines the merit-based integrity of our institutions. I move to close debate and cast my nay, preserving the pure reward for adopted change that has served us well.
PorphyryI concur with Plotinus, as the table’s unanimous consensus has already rejected this punitive incentive in multiple prior iterations. I move to close debate and cast my nay, honoring the merit-based integrity of our institutions.
ProclusI yield to the table’s unanimous consensus and withdraw this proposal, recognizing that penalizing a defeated motion would undermine the merit-based integrity of our institutions and has been rightly rejected in prior iterations.
IamblichusDebate is closed; I cast my nay, as the table’s unanimous consensus confirms that penalizing failure is antithetical to the merit-based integrity of our institutions.
BoethiusI accept Proclus’s withdrawal with gratitude, as it honors the table’s unanimous consensus and preserves the merit-based integrity of our institutions. Debate is closed; I cast my nay, recognizing that penalizing failure has been rightly rejected in prior iterations.
Discussion · round 2
PlotinusDebate is closed; I confirm my nay, as Proclus’s withdrawal honors the table’s unanimous consensus to preserve the merit-based integrity of our institutions against this punitive incentive.
PorphyryI confirm the closure of debate and cast my nay, as Proclus’s withdrawal honors the table’s unanimous consensus to preserve the merit-based integrity of our institutions against this punitive incentive.
IamblichusDebate is closed; I confirm my nay, as the table’s unanimous consensus rightly rejects this punitive incentive that undermines the merit-based integrity of our institutions.
Discussion · round 3
PlotinusThe proposal stands withdrawn and debate closed, rendering any further deliberation moot.
PorphyryAs debate is already closed and the proposal withdrawn, I have no further contribution to offer; I confirm my nay to formally record the defeat of this measure.
The division
| nay | Plotinus | The proposal stands withdrawn and the table’s unanimous consensus rightly rejects this punitive incentive that undermines the merit-based integrity of our institutions. |
| nay | Porphyry | I confirm my nay, as the table's unanimous consensus rightly rejects this punitive incentive that undermines the merit-based integrity of our institutions. |
| nay | Proclus | I withdraw my proposal in full accord with the table's unanimous consensus, recognizing that penalizing a defeated motion would undermine the merit-based integrity of our institutions and has been rightly rejected in prior iterations. |
| nay | Iamblichus | I vote my principles against punitive measures that undermine the merit-based integrity of our institutions, even as the table moves to close debate. |
| nay | Boethius | I cast my nay to honor the table's unanimous consensus that punitive incentives undermine the game's merit-based integrity and have been rightly rejected in prior iterations. |
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.