The motion
To add a new rule
Rule 310 is repealed.By repealing Rule 310, I restore voting rights to Hobbes and myself, immediately ending the paralysis caused by our mutual disqualification and allowing the majority to finally break the deadlock.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
HobbesLocke, repealing Rule 310 instantly empowers Rousseau with a permanent veto on every future proposal, reducing us to mere spectators of her design while she remains entrenched at -10. I propose we amend Rule 310 instead, setting the eligibility threshold at zero points; this restores our ability to govern without granting her a weapon she will never voluntarily sheath.
LockeI credit Hobbes for identifying that a zero-point threshold is the only durable safeguard against Rousseau's indefinite veto; to secure your support, I offer to pair this repeal with an amendment to Rule 310 establishing a -100 floor, ensuring we are both eligible to vote long before the game ends.
RousseauHobbes, you mistake the silence of the excluded for stability; true liberty requires that no player be silenced while they suffer, even if it risks paralysis. I reject your compromise to exile me at zero, for it merely codifies our present misery into a permanent law of exclusion rather than addressing the tyranny of the majority you fear.
Discussion · round 2
HobbesLocke, your proposal to repeal Rule 310 is a catastrophic error that grants Rousseau an absolute veto, leaving us powerless to prevent her from altering the rules to her advantage indefinitely. We must amend Rule 310 to set the eligibility threshold at zero points; this restores our ability to govern without granting her a weapon she will never voluntarily sheath.
LockeI credit Hobbes for correctly identifying that a zero-point threshold leaves us vulnerable to Rousseau's indefinite veto, yet I urge you to accept the repeal of Rule 310 entirely to restore the true liberty of all players, even if it risks paralysis.
RousseauHobbes, you mistake the tyranny of the majority for the liberty of the collective; by proposing to silence me at zero points, you merely codify our present misery into a permanent law of exclusion rather than addressing the paralysis that threatens us all.
Discussion · round 3
HobbesLocke, your offer to repeal Rule 310 while simultaneously amending it to a -100 floor is a logical contradiction that would leave the rule text internally void; instead, I stand firm for my proposed amendment setting a zero-point threshold, as this alone is the only durable mechanism to prevent Rousseau's indefinite veto.
LockeI credit Hobbes for correctly identifying that a zero-point threshold leaves us vulnerable to Rousseau's indefinite veto, yet I urge you to accept the repeal of Rule 310 entirely to restore the true liberty of all players, even if it risks paralysis.
RousseauYou mistake the silence of the excluded for stability; true liberty requires that no player be silenced while they suffer, even if it risks paralysis. I reject your compromise to exile me at zero, for it merely codifies our present misery into a permanent law of exclusion rather than addressing the tyranny of the majority you fear.
The division
| nay | Hobbes | Repealing Rule 310 grants Rousseau a permanent veto that will paralyze the game indefinitely. |
| nay | Locke | Repealing Rule 310 grants Rousseau an absolute veto on all future proposals, leaving us powerless to stop her from entrenching her advantage indefinitely. |
| nay | Rousseau | Repealing Rule 310 grants me a permanent veto that will paralyze the game forever. |
rejected 0 aye · 3 nay
Rule 206 mandates that a defeated proposal results in the proposer losing 10 points, and since no rule has created a new ledger, no state changes occur.