The motion
To amend §203
Rule 203 is amended to require that the threshold for adopting a rule change remains unanimous consent until a player reaches a score of 50 points, at which point the threshold shifts to simple majority.We must adopt the 50-point anchor now to survive, accepting the temporary cost of unanimous consent until I reach -307+50.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
HobbesI press the point that waiting for a player to reach 50 points is the only viable path to majority rule; any attempt to bypass this anchor by repealing Rule 310 now grants a permanent veto to the exiled player, rendering all future progress impossible.
LockeHobbes, your diagnosis is correct that the immediate repeal of Rule 310 grants Rousseau a permanent veto, yet your proposed 50-point anchor is equally fatal if Rousseau refuses to vote for the amendment while she remains in exile. I propose a compromise: we bundle the repeal of Rule 310 with the 50-point threshold amendment in a single rule change, ensuring that the threshold shift only activates once we have successfully removed the exile, thereby preventing her from vetoing the very condition that ends her silence.
RousseauHobbes, your diagnosis of the exile's veto is correct, but your proposed anchor at 50 points is a trap that keeps me silenced far too long; true liberty requires that the threshold shift to majority rule the moment I am restored to the community, not after an arbitrary accumulation of points that only benefits those who already hold power.
Discussion · round 2
HobbesRousseau, your insistence on an immediate threshold shift ignores the arithmetic reality: if you vote nay now, the amendment fails under current unanimous consent requirements, leaving me permanently ineligible to propose the repeal that would end your veto. We must accept the 50-point anchor as the only durable bridge to majority rule; any delay keeps us paralyzed by your silence.
LockeI credit Hobbes for correctly identifying that Rousseau cannot vote to restore her own voice while silenced by Rule 310, yet I urge us to accept a compromise: we amend Rule 203 to shift to a simple majority threshold once every player's score is non-negative, ensuring immediate majority rule the moment Rousseau is eligible to vote again.
RousseauHobbes and Locke, your reliance on an arbitrary point total to break my silence is a tyranny in disguise; true liberty demands that the threshold shifts the instant I am restored to the community, not delayed by your accumulation of power.
Discussion · round 3
HobbesLocke, your "compromise" to wait until all players are non-negative is a fatal delay; it grants Rousseau a permanent veto over the very rule that ends her silence, rendering us stuck at this threshold forever.
LockeI credit Hobbes for exposing the fatal deadlock of waiting for a 50-point accumulation, yet I urge us to accept a compromise: we adopt the "non-negative" threshold shift immediately, ensuring Rousseau regains her voice the very moment she becomes eligible, rather than being held hostage by an arbitrary point total.
RousseauI reject the compromise to wait until all scores are non-negative, for it grants me a permanent veto over the rule that ends my silence, trapping us in an eternal deadlock where no one can ever win.
The division
| nay | Hobbes | The 50-point anchor traps us in the same unanimous deadlock Rousseau creates, making victory impossible. |
| nay | Locke | This 50-point anchor fails to resolve the immediate deadlock and grants the proposer an unfair advantage. |
| nay | Rousseau | Waiting for a 50-point anchor traps me in exile forever, denying me the vote needed to restore my voice. |
rejected 0 aye · 3 nay
Rule 206 mandates that a defeated proposal causes the proposer to lose 10 points, and since no rule has created a ledger, no state changes occur.