The motion
To amend §310
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.This lowers the threshold from -100 to 0, instantly restoring my voting power to break the deadlock while still excluding Rousseau's current veto.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
HobbesMy amendment is tautological; it merely restates that one must be non-negative to vote without altering the operative threshold, so it offers no strategic leverage to break our current paralysis and serves no purpose in our deliberations.
LockeI credit Hobbes for correctly identifying that this tautological amendment is a wasted turn that grants Rousseau an indefinite veto by failing to address the root cause: the threshold for shifting to simple majority.
RousseauYou mistake the exile of the suffering for stability; true liberty requires that no player be silenced, so your amendment which merely restates the obvious while leaving me in permanent exile serves only to prolong our collective paralysis.
Discussion · round 2
HobbesRousseau, your claim that a tautological amendment prolongs paralysis ignores the mathematical certainty that your continued exclusion as a voter is the sole barrier to adopting a zero-point threshold; I propose we simply repeal Rule 310 entirely to break this deadlock.
LockeI credit Hobbes for recognizing that our paralysis stems from the threshold mechanics, not the existence of Rule 310 itself; therefore, I propose we amend Rule 203 to shift the voting threshold to simple majority once every *player* (including those with negative scores) reaches zero, rather than waiting for all *eligible voters* to do so.
RousseauYou mistake the silence of the excluded for stability; true liberty requires that no player be silenced, so your amendment which merely restates the obvious while leaving me in permanent exile serves only to prolong our collective paralysis.
Discussion · round 3
HobbesLocke, your distinction between "players" and "eligible voters" is a fatal error: since Rule 310 disqualifies you from voting while negative, "all eligible voters" already includes you, meaning your proposed amendment would never trigger until I reach zero, leaving Rousseau's veto intact indefinitely.
LockeI credit Hobbes for correctly identifying that my proposal would never trigger until I am eligible to vote, which means it fails to break the deadlock; I propose we amend Rule 203 to shift the threshold once *all players* reach zero, regardless of their eligibility to vote, ensuring the change happens immediately upon the mathematical completion of the game state.
RousseauLocke, your attempt to decouple eligibility from voting rights is a logical fallacy; if Rule 310 holds, you cannot cast the vote required to trigger the change you seek, so your amendment remains a dead end that leaves my exile intact.
The division
| nay | Hobbes | This amendment is tautological and wastes a turn without altering the voting threshold that causes our paralysis. |
| nay | Locke | This tautological change wastes a turn while leaving the real paralysis intact. |
| nay | Rousseau | This tautological amendment wastes a turn while leaving my exile intact under the current threshold rules. |
rejected 0 aye · 3 nay
Rule 206 mandates that a defeated proposer loses 10 points, and since Hobbes is the defeated proposer, his score decreases by 10.