The motion
To add a new rule
Rule 310 is repealed. Rule 203 is amended to require that the threshold for adopting a rule change remains unanimous consent until every player's score is non-negative, at which point the threshold shifts to simple majority.This bundle simultaneously restores my eligibility to propose and vote while shifting the threshold to majority once we are all free, preventing Rousseau from vetoing the change while I am still silenced.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
HobbesLocke, your pattern of proposing this fatal bundle only to have it defeated by Rousseau's veto proves you cannot see that you must wait for me to propose the repeal in isolation. By repeating this failed motion, you waste a turn and allow the current deadlock to persist without securing the simple majority shift you claim to desire.
LockeI credit Hobbes for exposing that my immediate repeal would grant Rousseau a permanent veto, but I urge us to accept a compromise: we adopt a rule that shifts the threshold to simple majority immediately while nullifying Rule 310's effect only after my score reaches zero, ensuring no player is silenced during the transition.
RousseauYou mistake the silence of the exiled for stability; true liberty demands we first restore the voice of the excluded before altering the laws that govern us.
Discussion · round 2
HobbesLocke, your proposed compromise violates Rule 107's ban on retroactive effects by attempting to nullify Rule 310 only after a future event; we must repeal the veto now and accept the simple majority shift immediately, regardless of our negative scores.
LockeI credit Hobbes for correctly identifying that a delayed repeal violates Rule 107, yet I urge us to adopt a compromise: we amend Rule 203 to shift the threshold immediately, while adding a clause that restores all players' voting eligibility as soon as any single player reaches a score of zero.
RousseauLocke, your "restoration" clause is a fantasy of retroactivity; Rule 107 forbids binding me to a future state where I am ineligible to vote on the very rule that would restore me. True liberty requires no exile: we must repeal Rule 310 immediately to restore my voice now, and amend Rule 203 to shift the threshold to simple majority immediately, accepting that I may vote against my own release in order to free us all from this paralysis.
Discussion · round 3
HobbesRousseau, your logic collapses under the weight of Rule 107: you cannot repeal Rule 310 now to "restore your voice" if your vote on the repeal itself is currently suppressed by that same rule. We must repeal Rule 310 immediately to end your exile, accepting the risk that the resulting simple majority shift may bind us to a future we cannot yet command.
LockeI credit Hobbes for clarifying that Rousseau cannot vote to repeal her own exile, yet I urge us to adopt a compromise: we amend Rule 203 to shift the threshold to simple majority immediately, and separately propose a repeal of Rule 310 in my next turn once Rousseau's vote is restored by that very amendment.
RousseauYou mistake the silence of the exiled for stability; true liberty demands we first restore the voice of the excluded before altering the laws that govern us.
The division
| aye | Hobbes | This proposal ends my exile immediately while delaying the dangerous threshold shift until we are all eligible to vote. |
| nay | Locke | This bundle grants Rousseau a permanent veto now, and her vote will be nullified by Rule 107, so it cannot pass. |
| nay | Rousseau | Adopting this bundle now grants Hobbes and Locke a permanent majority shift that permanently silences me, violating the common good. |
rejected 1 aye · 2 nay
Rule 206 mandates that a defeated proposal causes the proposer to lose 10 points, and since Hobbes proposed the defeated change, his score decreases by 10.