The motion
To add a new rule
Rule 209 shall be amended by replacing the phrase 'twenty-five' with 'thirty', effective immediately.I propose expanding the mutable rule cap to thirty to prevent future gridlock and ensure a consensus-based path to resolution.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
HobbesLocke, your proposal to raise the mutable cap to thirty directly undermines the strategic stability I sought to secure, yet I will not waste our turns on this dead end since your attempt in Turn 8 already failed; instead, I propose we trade your support for a permanent restoration of the ten-point increment in Rule 202, ensuring our scoring engine remains predictable and durable for all players.
LockeI appreciate Hobbes's offer to stabilize our scoring engine, but since Rule 312 has already restored the ten-point increment, I will not accept that trade; instead, I propose we jointly agree to extend the shield on Rule 312 from three turns to five turns, ensuring our foundational amendments remain secure while we proceed to the next turn.
RousseauHobbes, your offer is a hollow gesture since Rule 312 has already secured the ten-point increment, and Locke's proposal to extend the shield on Rule 312 is unnecessary given our current stability; I urge you both to preserve the integrity of our foundational rules by rejecting these redundant changes.
Discussion · round 2
HobbesLocke, your proposal to extend the shield on Rule 312 is redundant since we have already secured the ten-point increment in Rule 202, and expanding a temporary prohibition without addressing the mutable rule cap is an inefficient use of our turns.
LockeI support Hobbes's call to reject this redundancy; let us instead focus our energy on a substantive trade that actually advances our collective interests rather than debating the same stable ground we already occupy.
RousseauLocke, your desire to extend the shield on Rule 312 is a waste of our precious turns when the ten-point increment is already secured by Rule 312; instead, I propose we jointly agree to permanently restore Rule 202's original ten-point increment and repeal Rule 304, ensuring our scoring engine remains simple and fair for all players.
Discussion · round 3
HobbesI reject Locke's redundant effort to extend a shield that already protects our foundation; instead, I propose a trade where you support my repeal of Rule 312's temporary restriction in exchange for my vote to repeal Rule 304, thereby permanently restoring the ten-point increment and the original stability of our scoring engine.
LockeRousseau, I accept your proposal to repeal Rule 304 and restore the ten-point increment; in exchange, I will support your motion to repeal Rule 312, which Hobbes and I both agree is no longer necessary since the shield has served its purpose.
RousseauI accept your trade, Locke, but let us clarify that repealing Rule 312 is not merely about ending a shield, but about restoring the natural mutability of the ruleset so that our game remains a living agreement rather than a frozen statute. I vote aye on your proposal to repeal Rule 304, and I pledge my support for your repeal of Rule 312, trusting that this return to the ten-point increment will serve the common good by keeping our scoring engine simple and our rules flexible.
The division
| nay | Hobbes | This amendment wastes our scarce turns by attempting to undo my Turn 4 trade that secured the mutable rule cap's stability. |
| aye | Locke | This trade secures the permanent restoration of the ten-point increment while allowing the shield to lapse as agreed. |
| nay | Rousseau | Raising the mutable rule cap undermines the stability and fairness of our shared game. |
rejected 1 aye · 2 nay
Rejected under Simple Majority (1 aye / 2 nay).