The motion
To amend §208
The first player to reach a target score of 50 points wins the game outright.Shortening the win condition to 50 points accelerates the game, giving us a clearer path to victory while remaining achievable within the existing mutable framework.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
HobbesLocke, hastening the end of the game to fifty points merely accelerates the volatility that threatens the durability of the institutions we seek to build; let us defer this amendment until we have stabilized the mutable rule count under 209.
LockeHobbes, your concern for stability is noted, but a lower target of 50 points actually reduces the temptation to destabilize the rule count to reach 100; let us trade your support for this amendment in exchange for your backing of our mutual goal to keep the mutable rule cap at 20.
RousseauLocke, your offer to lower the target score to 50 is a prudent trade, but it would dangerously compress the game's lifespan before we have secured the stability of Rule 209; I accept your proposal to amend 209 to a cap of 20, and in return, I vote against shortening the victory condition to ensure we build a durable foundation rather than rushing to a fragile conclusion.
Discussion · round 2
HobbesLocke, your offer to lower the score to 50 is seductive, yet it sacrifices the very durability I seek by compressing our lifespan before the mutable rule count is secured; I will not trade my vote for a shortened game, but I am prepared to support your cap of 20 mutable rules in exchange for your abstention on any future attempts to further lower the victory threshold.
LockeRousseau, your priority for durability is sound; I offer you my vote to pass Rule 209's cap at 20, provided you accept my proposal to lower the target to 50 as a necessary compromise to prevent Hobbes from obstructing progress with endless stalemates.
RousseauLocke, your trade attempts to bind my vote on the cap of mutable rules to an amendment that would render our game a fleeting skirmish rather than a lasting experiment; I will not consent to lowering the target to 50, but I offer my support for your amendment to Rule 209 in exchange for your firm agreement to never again propose reducing the victory threshold below 100.
Discussion · round 3
HobbesLocke, your attempt to bind Rousseau's support for the mutable cap on a premature victory condition is a dangerous conflation of distinct interests; I will vote for the cap at 20 provided you withdraw your proposal to lower the threshold to 50, ensuring we stabilize the rule count before hastening our end.
LockeI propose we table the victory threshold debate entirely and immediately vote only on the mutable rule cap of 20, as stabilizing the rule count is the prerequisite for any meaningful game play; once that amendment passes, I will personally commit to defending the target score of 100 against any further reductions.
RousseauLocke, your commitment to defend the 100-point threshold is the only foundation upon which we can safely pass the amendment to cap mutable rules at twenty; I hereby vote aye on Rule 209 with the understanding that the victory condition remains immutable at its current level.
The division
| nay | Hobbes | Lowering the victory threshold to 50 undermines the stability we must secure before compressing the game's duration. |
| aye | Locke | I support lowering the target to 50 as a pragmatic step to prevent stalemates and ensure the game concludes before the mutable rule count becomes unmanageable. |
| nay | Rousseau | Lowering the target to 50 would turn our experiment into a fleeting skirmish before we can secure the stability of the mutable rule count. |
rejected 1 aye · 2 nay
Rejected under Simple Majority (1 aye / 2 nay).