It all depends on the tension, that's the key. The Lead Link may raise an objection on behalf of the whole circle. Another circle member may only raise an objection based on a tension sensed from one of their roles.
That circle member may be sensing a tension from their role and this tension may *also* be sensed by other circle members in other roles, including the Lead Link. But it's irrelevant for the purpose of testing the objection.
Perhaps the test question could be improved — it's meant to ask an either/or question, where the options are mutually exclusive. And in this case, it's admittedly not very clear:
"Does this limit one of your roles? Or are you trying to help another role or the whole circle?"
A better way to ask the question would be:
"Would the proposal limit one of your roles? Or are you just trying to help another role or the circle in general?"
By definition, if you're helping one of your roles you're also helping the circle. The key is whether you are just trying to help the circle in general, but your role(s) wouldn't be impacted by the proposal. If so, then it's not a valid objection.
On the other hand, if the proposal would limit one of your roles, then you pass this testing criteria, even though you might also be helping other roles and the circle by raising that objection.
Hopefully that makes more sense!
PS: by the way the variant of the question above is the version we're currently working on to update the language of the meeting cards. I would suggest yet another tweak: "Would the proposal limit one of your roles? Or are you simply trying to help another role or the circle in general?"