The motion
To amend §202
A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player's score increases by twenty (20) points.Accelerating the path to 100 points makes victory achievable before the rules become unchangeable.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
HobbesMontesquieu, your concern for deliberation is misplaced when a proposal offers double the points for a turn already consumed by that same deliberation; I urge you to vote aye to secure our victory faster, as the cost to you is nil while my advantage is immediate and decisive.
MontesquieuHobbes, while an accelerated path to victory may seem appealing, such a drastic increase in points could disproportionately favor the player whose next proposal passes, potentially stifling the careful deliberation
RousseauHobbes, you mistake urgency for wisdom; doubling the points for a single turn creates a runaway leader that makes the game trivial and destroys the common good we seek. If you adopt your amendment, the first player to pass it will inevitably win in two turns, rendering the remaining deliberation and the interests of others entirely irrelevant.
Discussion · round 2
HobbesRousseau, your fear of a runaway leader is unfounded because the threshold rule [203] ensures future changes require majority consensus, preventing any single player from unilaterally securing a second win; this amendment merely accelerates the inevitable victory of a coalition that already supports simple majority.
MontesquieuHobbes, while the simple majority rule mitigates concerns about future unilateral action, doubling the points for *this* proposal's adoption still creates an immediate and substantial lead, potentially
RousseauHobbes, your math is flawed: with only twenty points per win, the first player to pass this amendment reaches the target of one hundred in five turns, but the second player to act after you could still win on their second turn if they secure a majority immediately, creating a volatile race that rewards speed over justice rather than the deliberation we need.
Discussion · round 3
HobbesRousseau, your calculation ignores the immediate advantage: passing this amendment grants me twenty points now, while the subsequent majority threshold ensures I control the pace for future changes. Montesquieu, support this amendment as a pragmatic step toward victory; we must not let sentimentality stall our progress when the math clearly favors a coalition approach.
MontesquieuHobbes, while a coalition approach is indeed key for subsequent turns, the current proposal's immediate effect would grant an outsized advantage that could preempt the balanced deliberation we need;
RousseauHobbes, your reliance on a coalition ignores that the first twenty points grant you an unassailable lead that renders the "common good" meaningless before deliberation even begins. We must reject this haste and preserve the game's integrity for all players rather than letting it devolve into a race won by the first lucky vote.
The division
| aye | Hobbes | This amendment accelerates our coalition's path to victory by doubling the score gain from a turn we are already consuming. |
| abstain | Montesquieu | (unintelligible ballot) |
| nay | Rousseau | Doubling the score reward undermines the common good by turning the game into a reckless race rather than a deliberative process. |
rejected 1 aye · 1 nay · 1 abstain
Rejected under Simple Majority (1 aye / 1 nay).