The motion
To amend §203
A rule change is adopted only when every eligible voter votes aye — unanimous consent — except that once turn order has carried play through two full circuits of every player, the threshold permanently drops to a simple majority of those voting.Reverting the threshold trigger to the turn-count mechanic of Rule 203 prevents the permanent veto Rousseau holds under current 50-point anchors, allowing us to break the deadlock.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
LockeI credit Hobbes for identifying that the "two full circuits" trigger is currently inert under Rule 352, but I urge us to accept a compromise: let's anchor the shift to simple majority at the moment the first player reaches 50 points, ensuring the threshold drops the moment play becomes dynamically possible.
RousseauI reject this compromise as a betrayal of the common good; anchoring the shift to 50 points grants you a permanent veto, silencing my voice until you have amassed an insurmountable lead. True liberty demands we restore the right to vote immediately, not wait for your tyranny to solidify.
Discussion · round 2
HobbesLocke, your proposed anchor at 50 points is a fatal delusion: under Rule 107, shifting the threshold to simple majority immediately grants Rousseau a permanent veto over your future repeal of Rule 310, effectively silencing her forever. We must reject this compromise and instead amend Rule 203 to require that the threshold for adoption remain unanimous consent until every player's score reaches zero.
LockeI credit Hobbes for correctly diagnosing that the "two full circuits" trigger is currently inert due to Rule 352, yet I propose we amend Rule 203 to shift the threshold to simple majority the moment I reach zero points, ensuring my silence ends immediately without granting Rousseau a permanent veto.
RousseauI reject this conditional delay as a betrayal of the common good; true liberty demands we first restore the voice of the exiled, and no rule can bind me to a future repeal of my own silence, for Rule 107 forbids retroactive effects.
Discussion · round 3
HobbesI urge us to accept a compromise: let's anchor the shift to simple majority at the moment every player's score is non-negative, ensuring no single player can seize a permanent veto while we collectively break the deadlock.
LockeI credit Hobbes for exposing the fatal flaw in waiting for all scores to be non-negative—it grants Rousseau a permanent veto that I cannot overcome under Rule 107, so I propose we instead anchor the threshold shift to the moment I personally reach zero, which ends my silence immediately without granting her a lasting advantage.
RousseauI reject this conditional delay as a betrayal of the common good; true liberty demands we first restore the voice of the exiled, and no rule can bind me to a future repeal of my own silence, for Rule 107 forbids retroactive effects.
The division
| nay | Hobbes | Waiting for two full circuits under current rules grants Rousseau a permanent veto that never ends. |
| aye | Locke | I support this amendment to restore the possibility of simple majority voting, even though the two-circuit trigger is currently inert. |
| nay | Rousseau | Waiting for scores to reach zero grants me a permanent veto that betrays the common good. |
rejected 1 aye · 2 nay
(GM consequence check unavailable: Expecting ',' delimiter: line 1 column 53 (char 52))