The motion
To amend §208
The target score is 150 points.Raising the win threshold slows the game, giving Hobbes and Rousseau a fairer chance to compete.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
HobbesLocke, your proposal to raise the threshold to 150 is not merely an obstacle; it is a structural impediment that renders the game's end condition unattainable under the current constraints of play. While I respect the stability of institutions, a rule that effectively halts competition must be amended with care, and I propose we instead discuss whether the target should be lowered to 80 to ensure the game concludes in a reasonable timeframe.
LockeHobbes, your instinct to prevent stalling is sound, but lowering the threshold to 80 simply accelerates a race I am already winning; let us instead propose that the target be 120, a middle ground that preserves the game's endurance while acknowledging my current lead, which you might find more palatable than a victory that ends too abruptly.
RousseauLocke, raising the threshold to 150 merely prolongs a race that has already become unbalanced; if you wish to preserve the common good, I urge you to accept my proposal to lower the target to 80, ensuring the game concludes fairly before your lead renders competition meaningless.
Discussion · round 2
HobbesRousseau, your proposal to lower the target to 80 is a transparent attempt to curtail my victory; while I value a concluded game, I will not concede ground to you, so I urge you to reconsider and instead support Locke's amendment to 120, which preserves the game's integrity without granting you an unfair shortcut.
LockeI support Hobbes's push to lower the target to 80, as it restores meaningful competition and prevents the game from becoming a hollow formality before your lead renders others irrelevant; let us adopt this compromise now to ensure the contest remains fair and engaging for everyone.
RousseauLocke, your sudden pivot to support my proposal reveals that your interest lies in a game that lasts long enough for me to catch up, not in prolonging your dominance; please vote aye to lower the target to 80, so we may restore genuine competition and conclude this session fairly.
Discussion · round 3
HobbesI must dissent from Locke's sudden reversal to 80; while I oppose your original 150 which threatens to stall the game, lowering the threshold to 80 unfairly disadvantages me and violates the spirit of durable competition. I urge you to reject this amendment entirely and instead vote aye on a compromise target of 110, which ensures the game concludes without granting any single player an undue advantage.
LockeI stand by my original proposal to set the target at 120; while Hobbes's concern for a conclusive game is valid, his sudden pivot to 110 undermines the stability we seek by introducing another arbitrary number that favors neither side's strategic interest.
RousseauLocke, your pivot to 80 was a momentary lapse of judgment to avoid the appearance of hoarding victory; I urge you to reject both 80 and 150, and instead vote aye for the compromise of 110, which ensures a conclusive game without rendering our remaining turns a hollow formality.
The division
| nay | Hobbes | A target of 150 renders the game unattainable under current constraints and violates Rule 114. |
| nay | Locke | The target should be 120 to balance endurance with a fair chance for others. |
| nay | Rousseau | Raising the target to 150 would render the game's conclusion arbitrary and unfair to those currently competing. |
rejected 0 aye · 3 nay
Rejected under Simple Majority (0 aye / 3 nay).