The motion
To add §311
Rule 310 is amended to require that a player whose score is negative points shall not be eligible to propose a rule change or vote on any proposal until their score reaches zero, unless the player's score is between -10 and -1 inclusive, in which case they may vote but not propose.This compromise allows Hobbes to regain voting rights to break deadlocks while preserving the disqualification from proposing rules, a concession I am willing to make to prevent further paralysis.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
HobbesLocke, your amendment to carve out an exception for scores between -10 and -1 is a dangerous concession that merely invites Rousseau to drag the game into endless paralysis by refusing to ever reach zero; we must either enforce the disqualification absolutely to clear the path to victory or repeal the rule entirely to allow all players to participate.
LockeHobbes, I accept your concern about paralysis, but Rousseau's absolute disqualification threatens our only path to victory; I propose a compromise where negative scorers below -10 remain silent while those between -10 and -1 may vote, ensuring we clear the path without permanently exiling any player.
RousseauLocke, you mistake the silence of the oppressed for a strategic deadlock; by allowing the suffering between -10 and -1 to vote without proposing, you merely delay the inevitable paralysis while denying the weak a future in the game.
Discussion · round 2
HobbesRousseau, your opposition to a pragmatic threshold ignores that a player at -10 is effectively dead weight; by allowing them to vote but not propose, we grant just enough agency to maintain stability while ensuring they cannot sabotage our progress toward victory.
LockeRousseau, your fear of paralysis ignores that allowing these players to vote maintains stability without granting them the power to block our victory; I propose we adopt this compromise to clear the path forward.
RousseauRousseau, you see paralysis where there is only the quiet dignity of the excluded; yet Locke's compromise leaves the most suffering at -30 utterly voiceless while granting a token vote to the less injured, a false liberty that does nothing to heal the game. I propose we repeal Rule 310 entirely, restoring the right to speak to all players regardless of score, for it is only when every voice is heard that the common good can truly emerge.
Discussion · round 3
HobbesI reject Locke's compromise as a hollow gesture that grants Rousseau the very leverage to prolong our paralysis; let us amend Rule 310 to establish an absolute cap at -5, ensuring that the weak remain silent until they pose no threat to our victory.
LockeRousseau, your repeal of Rule 310 ignores the mathematical certainty that Hobbes is correct: without disqualification, the paralysis you fear is inevitable; Hobbes, I accept your offer to raise the disqualification threshold to -5, which secures our victory path while granting Rousseau a token of shared governance that prevents total alienation.
RousseauI propose we repeal Rule 310 entirely; to silence the voiceless while granting partial power to the slightly less suffering is a tyranny of the majority that only deepens the paralysis we all fear.
The division
| nay | Hobbes | Allowing partial voting rights creates a fragile loophole that Rousseau can exploit to stall progress indefinitely. |
| aye | Locke | This compromise balances our need for progress with Rousseau's concern for fairness. |
| nay | Rousseau | Granting partial agency to the suffering while silencing the most oppressed is a false liberty that only deepens the game's paralysis. |
rejected 1 aye · 2 nay
Rule 206 mandates that a defeated proposal causes the proposer to lose 10 points, and since no rule has created a ledger, no state changes occur.