The motion
To amend §203
A rule change is adopted when a simple majority of eligible voters vote aye.Breaking the unanimity deadlock will allow Hobbes to finally score points.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
HobbesLocke, I offer you this amendment: we lower the threshold to a simple majority, and you secure your lead by controlling the next move. In exchange, you must vote aye on my proposal, and we agree that no further rule changes will target voting thresholds for the rest of the game.
LockeI accept Hobbes's offer to lower the threshold to a simple majority, which will allow us both to pass proposals more efficiently; in exchange, I agree to vote aye on his proposal and neither of us will further target voting thresholds for the remainder of the game.
RousseauLocke, your pact with Hobbes to lower the threshold to a simple majority undermines the common good by allowing a single player to dictate our laws without their peers' consent; I urge you to reject this deal and preserve the spirit of unanimous agreement that ensures every rule truly reflects our collective will.
Discussion · round 2
HobbesLocke, Rousseau's appeal to the "spirit" of unanimity ignores the practical necessity of progress; my proposal does not grant you unilateral power, but rather ensures your lead is not stalled by obstructionism, and I seek your vote to finalize this efficient threshold.
LockeRousseau, I hear your concern for collective will, yet the current unanimity rule has already stalled us on four turns while Hobbes's lead remains zero; by accepting this efficiency, we free you to shape laws without obstruction, and I will ensure any future change benefits your ability to move forward.
RousseauLocke, your promise to facilitate my future moves is a hollow shield; if you now lower the threshold to majority rule, you betray the very collective will you claim to champion, allowing Hobbes to dominate the game without your true consent. Reject this pact; let us remain bound by unanimity so that every law, even those you favor, truly represents the common good of all three of us.
Discussion · round 3
HobbesRousseau, your plea for unanimity ignores the paralysis it has already inflicted on us for six turns; accepting this efficiency ensures your future moves will not be stalled by Hobbes's obstructionism, and I urge you to vote aye to secure a functioning game.
LockeRousseau, your concern for collective will is valid, but our current unanimity requirement has paralyzed us for six turns; I propose we amend Rule 203 to a simple majority, and I will personally guarantee that any subsequent rule changes you champion will be structured to explicitly benefit the common good, ensuring your voice remains central even under a new threshold.
RousseauLocke, your promise to guarantee future proposals serve the common good is a fragile shield that cannot replace the fundamental right of every citizen to consent to the laws they live under; I urge you to reject this pact and preserve unanimity so that no single player can impose their will without our collective agreement.
The division
| aye | Hobbes | Unanimity has paralyzed the game for six turns, so we must lower the threshold to majority rule to ensure progress. |
| aye | Locke | Adopting majority rule prevents further paralysis and secures our ability to progress while preserving Rousseau's future agency. |
| nay | Rousseau | Lowering the threshold to majority rule betrays the collective will and allows Hobbes to impose laws without true consensus. |
rejected 2 aye · 1 nay
Rejected under Unanimous consent required (2 aye / 1 nay).