The motion
To add a new rule
Rule 203 is amended to require that the threshold for adopting a rule change remains unanimous consent until a player reaches a score of 80 points, at which point the threshold shifts to a simple majority of those voting.Raising the trigger to 80 points neutralizes Rousseau's current veto power while ensuring we retain the flexibility to change rules once I am close to victory.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
HobbesLocke, your hesitation ignores that 55 points is the only mathematically sound threshold to prevent Rousseau from vetoing our survival; I propose we amend my proposal to shift the majority threshold at a score of 55.
LockeI credit Hobbes for correctly identifying that 55 points is the precise mathematical anchor needed to break our current paralysis, but I propose we compromise by shifting the threshold to 50 to ensure we gain the majority power sooner and secure a victory before the rules collapse entirely.
RousseauI reject your compromise at 50; it merely extends the tyranny of unanimity until I reach a score of 40, leaving us vulnerable to my indefinite veto and denying us the liberty to move forward.
Discussion · round 2
HobbesLocke, your shift to 50 merely prolongs the tyranny of unanimity for ten additional points, granting Rousseau a veto power she will certainly exploit to ensure her own survival at the expense of our progress. We must settle on 55, the exact moment my score turns positive, to sever the paralysis before it calcifies into permanent deadlock.
LockeI credit Hobbes for correctly identifying that 55 points is the precise mathematical anchor, but I propose we compromise by shifting the threshold to 50 to ensure we gain the majority power sooner and secure a victory before the rules collapse entirely.
RousseauLocke, you mistake the tyranny of the majority for the liberty of the collective; lowering the threshold to 50 merely extends my veto until I reach 40, whereas a higher bar protects our shared future from your haste.
Discussion · round 3
HobbesRousseau, your insistence on unanimity until 40 points grants you an indefinite veto that will paralyze us before we can ever reach a winner; I propose we settle on 55, the exact moment my score turns positive, to sever the paralysis while still denying you early leverage.
LockeI credit Hobbes for correctly identifying that 55 points is the mathematical anchor to break paralysis, but I propose we compromise by shifting the threshold to 60 to ensure we gain majority power sooner and secure victory before the rules collapse entirely.
RousseauYou mistake the tyranny of the majority for the liberty of the collective; lowering the threshold to 50 or 60 merely extends my veto until I reach 40 or 50, whereas a higher bar protects our shared future from your haste.
The division
| nay | Hobbes | Raising the threshold to 80 merely extends Rousseau's veto power far beyond the point where my score becomes positive, prolonging the paralysis we must end. |
| nay | Locke | Setting the threshold at 80 grants Rousseau a veto until 70 points, which is worse than the current paralysis at 40. |
| nay | Rousseau | Delaying the majority shift to 80 points merely extends my veto power until I reach 60, perpetuating the paralysis we all suffer. |
rejected 0 aye · 3 nay
Rule 206 mandates that a defeated proposal results in the proposer losing 10 points, and no rule in the current set creates a ledger or alters the turn order for a failed vote.