The motion
To add a new rule
[212] (mutable) If a player proposes a rule change that removes or weakens a voting threshold for future proposals, that proposal requires unanimous consent regardless of the current turn.This forces everyone to agree before I can lower the bar, stopping me from rigging the game immediately.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
HobbesLocke, I see you already own the ground with that unanimous-vote amendment; let's trade: if you vote aye on my proposal, I will vote aye on your next turn, ensuring you keep your majority rule while I secure my point.
LockeHobbes, your proposal is redundant noise; it attempts to manipulate a turn-based mechanic that doesn't exist, wasting our precious voting cycles. I reject your trade, but I will let your proposal fail on its own merits so I can move directly to scoring my second point and closing out the game.
RousseauI reject this trade: a rule that blocks my future points by forcing unanimity is a direct attack on the very mechanism I need to win, and I will vote nay to preserve the majority rule that lets us all play.
Discussion · round 2
HobbesLocke, you mistake my proposal for redundancy when it is actually a defensive shield against your own future amendments; if you want your path to victory clear, vote aye and let me take my point now. Rousseau, your opposition confirms this rule is necessary to preserve the game's integrity, but your nay vote will doom us both to a stalemate that benefits no one.
LockeRousseau, your nay vote is the only thing standing between me and my second point; cast aye now and let Hobbes's redundant rule fail on its own merits while I secure my victory.
RousseauLocke, your threat to close out the game by voting nay on my proposal is precisely why this rule is needed; let me take my point now, and I promise to vote aye on your next proposal to secure your victory before any chaos ensues.
Discussion · round 3
HobbesI accept your promise, Rousseau: vote nay on my proposal to ensure your amendment passes under majority rule, and I will grant you my point and your turn; this trade lets me score now while you secure the majority threshold that prevents me from ever forcing unanimity.
LockeRousseau, your promise is worthless; only written rules bind us, so I will vote nay on Hobbes's proposal to preserve my path to victory and let you attempt your trade with Hobbes instead.
RousseauLocke, your refusal to vote nay on my proposal is the only way I can force unanimity and steal your point, so I must vote nay to block my own proposal and deny you a win; meanwhile, Hobbes, your promise to grant me a point is worthless since only rules bind us, leaving me exposed to your next move.
The division
| nay | Hobbes | This rule would block my ability to rewrite voting thresholds and secure my victory. |
| nay | Locke | This rule would require unanimity for my victory, blocking my path to the win. |
| nay | Rousseau | This rule traps me under unanimity forever and blocks my path to the 10 points needed to win. |
rejected 0 aye · 3 nay
Rejected under Majority of votes cast (Turn 3+) (0 aye / 3 nay).