The motion
To add a new rule
A player who proposes a rule change that has been defeated in the immediately preceding turn by a vote of 1-2 shall not be eligible to propose again for a period of three turns.To curb the repeated failure of my amendments and force more stable consensus.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
HobbesThe 1-2 defeats in Turns 1, 3, 6, and 8 demonstrate that my proposals consistently fail due to Locke's strategic opposition rather than flaws in principle; this amendment would prevent him from exploiting my momentum while preserving the durability of institutions against transient majorities.
LockeYour proposal inadvertently punishes me for my own strategic failures, yet it would unfairly freeze my momentum just as I approach victory at 31 points. I am willing to compromise by extending the "cool-down" period to five turns if we can agree that a player defeated 2-1 should not face such a severe penalty, but I cannot support a rule that targets me specifically without mutual consent.
RousseauI propose we expand this penalty to apply equally to any player defeated by a 2-1 margin in the preceding turn, thereby preventing Hobbes from exploiting my momentum as he would be prevented from exploiting yours; this ensures the rule serves the common good by curbing strategic retaliation rather than targeting individuals.
Discussion · round 2
HobbesI accept Rousseau's amendment to apply this cooling-off period universally, thereby converting a personal grievance into a durable institution that preserves the integrity of the turn order against any player's erratic opposition. This measured reform ensures that no single player can exploit the volatility of 1-2 defeats to sabotage the game's progress, while Locke retains sufficient agency to propose future changes after a brief, fair pause.
LockeI credit Hobbes for transforming a personal grievance into a durable institution that preserves the game's integrity, and I will vote aye to extend this cooling-off period to all players to prevent any single individual from exploiting transient majorities. This compromise ensures the rules remain stable against volatility while fairly restricting everyone's ability to sabotage the turn order immediately after a defeat.
RousseauI support this universal cooling-off period as a necessary check on the volatility that has plagued our recent turns, ensuring that no single player can repeatedly exploit transient majorities to destabilize the game's progress. By applying this restriction equally to Hobbes and Locke, we transform a momentary defeat into a durable institution that serves the common good and preserves the integrity of the turn order for everyone.
Discussion · round 3
HobbesThe proposed universal cooling-off period effectively neutralizes the volatility of transient 2-1 defeats, transforming a source of instability into a durable institution that serves the common good; I accept this measured reform as it prevents any single player from exploiting the rules to sabotage progress without unfairly freezing anyone's momentum.
LockeI propose we reduce the universal cooling-off period from three turns to two, ensuring that even a player with a low score like Hobbes can recover quickly without granting an undue advantage to those already near victory. This adjustment maintains the stabilizing effect of the rule while preventing it from becoming a mechanism that disproportionately hinders comeback efforts, thus serving the common good of dynamic play.
RousseauLocke's reduction to two turns is a prudent concession that balances stability with the need for dynamic comeback opportunities; I support this refined proposal as it preserves the integrity of the turn order without unduly penalizing players seeking to recover from defeat.
The division
| aye | Hobbes | This rule stabilizes the game by converting transient defeats into a durable institution that prevents strategic volatility. |
| aye | Locke | This universal cooling-off period stabilizes the game against transient majorities while allowing all players a fair path to recovery. |
| aye | Rousseau | This rule prevents strategic retaliation after a narrow defeat and stabilizes the game for everyone. |
carried 3 aye · 0 nay
As engrossed
Enacted · §316 Turn 16 · Proposal §316 on the motion of Hobbes Carried 3 aye · 0 nay
A player who proposes a rule change that has been defeated in the immediately preceding turn by a vote of 1-2 shall not be eligible to propose again for a period of three turns.
The adopted rule imposes a future restriction on proposal eligibility but does not alter the current turn's outcome, scores, or win condition, so no scores change and play proceeds to the next player in the fixed order.