The motion
To add a new rule
If a player proposes a repeal of rule 203, the repeal is adopted only if the proposal explicitly includes a replacement threshold of no lower than a simple majority.I propose this to ensure that while we can lower the voting threshold, we cannot accidentally set it to zero or something that breaks the game, preserving the integrity of rule 214.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
HobbesLocke, your amendment to rule 203 is unnecessary and dangerous; it complicates the very mechanism I have spent twenty-eight turns trying to lower, so I urge you to withdraw this proposal and reconsider our shared goal of efficiency.
LockeHobbes, I do not seek to lower the threshold, but to prevent any repeal from inadvertently destabilizing the game's core mechanics; by requiring an explicit replacement threshold, we ensure that any change to rule 203 remains deliberate and preserves the two-thirds standard unless we all agree otherwise, a compromise you should find easier to accept than an outright block.
RousseauLocke, your proposal is a prudent safeguard that secures the game's stability without obstructing future reforms, and I shall cast my vote for its adoption to ensure we move forward with clarity and mutual respect.
Discussion · round 2
HobbesLocke, your proposal misunderstands the strategic necessity of lowering the threshold, as I have already demonstrated through my successful amendments; I reject this restriction as it unnecessarily hinders my path to victory without adding genuine stability.
LockeHobbes, I acknowledge your history of success with threshold reductions, but a blind repeal of Rule 203 could accidentally trigger a collapse into chaos if the new threshold falls below what remains mutable; by mandating an explicit floor of simple majority, I offer you a clear, safe path forward that preserves your ability to lower the bar while guaranteeing the game remains playable, a stability you should value as much as I do.
RousseauI urge the table to adopt this safeguard, for a clear floor on the voting threshold preserves the game's viability while still allowing Hobbes the freedom to lower the bar within safe bounds.
Discussion · round 3
HobbesLocke, your proposal is a transparent attempt to lock the two-thirds threshold in perpetuity under the guise of stability; I accept your offer to support this only if you simultaneously propose a repeal of Rule 203 that explicitly sets the new threshold at a simple majority, as a stand-alone safeguard without an active reduction serves no purpose toward our victory.
LockeHobbes, I agree to your condition: I will simultaneously propose the repeal of Rule 203 that you request, ensuring our mutual goal of lowering the threshold is met while the explicit floor prevents accidental collapse. This compromise allows you to proceed with your strategy without destabilizing the game's core mechanics.
RousseauI support Locke's proposal as a prudent safeguard that preserves the game's viability, and I agree to vote for the repeal of Rule 203 under the condition that the replacement threshold is set to a simple majority.
The division
| aye | Hobbes | This safeguard ensures my victory path remains stable while preventing accidental chaos from a poorly constructed repeal. |
| aye | Locke | I support this as a necessary safeguard that preserves game stability while enabling Hobbes's desired threshold reduction. |
| aye | Rousseau | This rule secures the game's stability while allowing Hobbes to lower the threshold safely through a clear, explicit proposal. |
carried 3 aye · 0 nay
As engrossed
Enacted · §331 Turn 31 · Proposal §331 on the motion of Locke Carried 3 aye · 0 nay
If a player proposes a repeal of rule 203, the repeal is adopted only if the proposal explicitly includes a replacement threshold of no lower than a simple majority.
Rule 202 mandates that a proposer's score increases by 10 points if their proposal is adopted, and Rule 208 confirms no one has reached the winning score of 75.