This paper provides a game theoretical framework to analyze speech acts in rules-based communication places such as Parliamentary debates and Bibliobattle. The game consists of two stages:(1) the first stage of deliberation, and (2) the second stage of resolution. In the first stage, players discuss a common topic from various viewpoints, and in the second stage all the participants decide which opinion is plausible following a social choice rule as voting. The theory to examine the game involves dynamic epistemic logic (so-called dynamic game logic), and then enables us to focus on players' epistemic states through speech acts. Furthermore, it is connected to a part of mechanism design in the second stage, and secures players' incentives compatibility in social decisions. As a result, it captures how the rules work and what kind of speeches in speech places are derived through players' strategic thinking with rationality.