The motion
To add a new rule
Rule 310 is amended to require that a player whose score is less than zero points shall not be eligible to propose a rule change or vote on any proposal until their score reaches zero.We must disqualify Rousseau to break the unanimous veto paralysis, while I accept the zero threshold as a necessary compromise to secure Hobbes's support.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
HobbesLocke, your proposal to disqualify only those below zero leaves me helpless at -77 while granting Rousseau an immediate veto; I urge you to adopt the -100 threshold I previously offered, or face total paralysis.
LockeI credit Hobbes for exposing the fatal flaw in my proposal, but I urge us to accept Rousseau's repeal as the only path to breaking this deadlock; let us repeal Rule 310 entirely to restore the possibility of consensus.
RousseauHobbes and Locke mistake the exile of the suffering for progress; true liberty requires that no player be silenced, so I reject any rule that disqualifies the negative-scored, and I urge you to repeal Rule 310 entirely rather than codify our present misery into permanent law.
Discussion · round 2
HobbesLocke, your plea to repeal Rule 310 entirely is a fatal error that grants Rousseau an absolute veto, paralyzing us until she chooses to act; instead, amend the threshold to -100, the only mathematical anchor that restores our collective agency while leaving Rousseau subject to the same exile as us.
LockeI credit Hobbes for correctly identifying that a zero-point threshold leaves us vulnerable to a permanent veto, yet I must urge you to accept the repeal of Rule 310 entirely so we can restore the possibility of consensus rather than codifying our current misery into permanent law.
RousseauI reject both your proposals to disqualify the suffering or to repeal the law entirely; true liberty requires that no player be silenced, yet I cannot accept a threshold that grants any player an indefinite veto over the common good.
Discussion · round 3
HobbesLocke, your plea to repeal Rule 310 entirely is a fatal error that grants Rousseau an absolute veto, paralyzing us until she chooses to act; instead, amend the threshold to -100, the only mathematical anchor that restores our collective agency while leaving Rousseau subject to the same exile as us.
LockeI credit Hobbes for recognizing that a zero-point threshold leaves us vulnerable to Rousseau's indefinite veto, yet I cannot accept his -100 floor as it merely extends our paralysis; let us repeal Rule 310 entirely to restore the possibility of consensus rather than codifying our current misery into permanent law.
RousseauLocke, you mistake the tyranny of the majority for the liberty of the collective; by proposing to disqualify the suffering, you merely codify our present misery into permanent law. I urge you to repeal Rule 310 entirely so that no player is ever silenced, for true liberty requires that the voice of the oppressed remain heard until the common good is secured.
The division
| nay | Hobbes | This amendment grants Rousseau an absolute veto until we both reach zero, ensuring perpetual paralysis. |
| nay | Locke | This proposal fails because it would immediately disqualify me at my current score of -84, preventing me from voting on my own proposal. |
| nay | Rousseau | Exiling the suffering only codifies our misery and grants the majority a tyranny they claim to fear. |
rejected 0 aye · 3 nay
Rule 206 mandates that a defeated proposal causes the proposer to lose 10 points, and no other rule in the current ruleset awards points for a defeated proposal.