The motion
To add a new rule
Rule 203 is amended to read: 'A rule change is adopted only when every eligible voter votes aye — unanimous consent — except that once turn order has carried play through three full circuits of every player, the threshold permanently drops to a simple majority of those voting.'I propose delaying the majority threshold to three circuits rather than two, preserving the spirit of unanimous consent longer to prevent the tyranny of the majority from curbing deliberation too early.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
HobbesRousseau, you threaten to delay the shift to majority rule by one full circuit; I urge you to accept my proposal of twenty rules, which balances the need for stability against the risk of §114, rather than stalling for a third circuit.
LockeI credit Rousseau for her concern about stability, but I urge the table to reject this delay of the majority threshold in favor of my earlier proposal to cap mutable rules at twenty, which preserves flexibility without stalling the game's natural progression.
RousseauI urge you to reject Hobbes's haste and Locke's compromise, for delaying the shift to majority until three full circuits ensures that the transition occurs only when the ruleset has stabilized, preventing premature tyranny by a fleeting majority.
KantI propose that Rule 209 be amended to allow exactly twenty-four mutable rules, a number sufficient to prevent the dead end of §114 while remaining below the current cap of twenty-five, thereby preserving the game's integrity without unnecessary delay.
WollstonecraftTo delay majority rule is merely to postpone the inevitable stagnation of a rigid oligarchy; instead of fighting over the pace of transition, let us unite to lower the cap on mutable rules from twenty-five to twenty, ensuring the game remains a living experiment rather than a museum piece.
Discussion · round 2
HobbesRousseau, your delay of the majority threshold only prolongs a fragile equilibrium that invites paralysis, whereas a clear cap on mutable rules at twenty provides the durable structure necessary for genuine progress without stalling the inevitable shift toward majority rule.
LockeI credit Rousseau for prioritizing stability and Wollstonecraft for recognizing the value of a concrete cap, yet I urge the table to reject the delay of the majority threshold entirely in favor of a simpler solution: permanently capping mutable rules at twenty, which ensures game vitality without stalling our natural progression.
RousseauI urge the table to reject this delay in favor of Wollstonecraft's proposal to cap mutable rules at twenty, for a rigid limit on the very substance of change is a more stable safeguard against paralysis than merely postponing the moment when change becomes easier.
KantI reject Rousseau's delay as a violation of the principle that procedures must be stated precisely and efficiently; instead, I urge the table to amend Rule 209 to permit exactly twenty-four mutable rules, a number sufficient to prevent the dead end of §114 while preserving the game's structural integrity.
WollstonecraftI urge the table to reject Rousseau's delay to a third circuit; true reform requires us to seize the majority threshold now, not wait for a phantom equilibrium, and I will vote aye for any motion that caps mutable rules at twenty to ensure our game remains a living experiment.
Discussion · round 3
HobbesI urge the table to reject Rousseau's delay to a third circuit and adopt Wollstonecraft's cap of twenty mutable rules; this provides the durable structure necessary to prevent the paralysis of §114 while securing the shift to majority rule without unnecessary stalling.
LockeI credit Kant for his precise arithmetic and Wollstonecraft for her urgency, yet I urge the table to reject both their specific numbers and Rousseau's delay; instead, let us adopt a compromise cap of twenty-two mutable rules, which preserves the game's vitality without the rigidity of twenty or the near-totality of twenty-four, ensuring we progress without triggering a deadlock.
RousseauI urge the table to reject this delay and embrace the cap of twenty-two mutable rules proposed by Locke, for a moderate limit on the substance of change is a more stable safeguard against paralysis than merely postponing the moment when change becomes easier.
KantI urge the table to reject all specific numerical caps and Rousseau's procedural delay, as arbitrary numbers and stalled transitions violate the principle that rules must be stated precisely and applied without unnecessary obstruction to the game's natural progression.
WollstonecraftLet us reject Locke's arbitrary compromise of twenty-two rules and Kant's pedantic fixation on twenty-four; instead, we must unite to lower the cap to twenty, ensuring our game remains a living experiment rather than a museum piece trapped by stagnation.
The division
| aye | Hobbes | Delaying the majority shift to three circuits unnecessarily prolongs the fragile equilibrium that invites paralysis. |
| aye | Locke | Delaying majority rule until three circuits preserves stability while adopting a concrete cap on mutable rules prevents stagnation. |
| aye | Rousseau | Delaying the shift to majority rule until three circuits ensures the game stabilizes before democracy takes hold, preventing premature tyranny. |
| nay | Kant | This amendment unnecessarily delays the transition to majority rule, violating the principle that procedures must be stated precisely and efficiently. |
| aye | Wollstonecraft | Delaying majority rule to three circuits merely postpones the stagnation of an oligarchy; we must seize the power of the majority now. |
carried 4 aye · 1 nay
As engrossed
Enacted · §311 Turn 11 · Proposal §311 on the motion of Rousseau Carried 4 aye · 1 nay
Rule 203 is amended to read: 'A rule change is adopted only when every eligible voter votes aye — unanimous consent — except that once turn order has carried play through three full circuits of every player, the threshold permanently drops to a simple majority of those voting.'
Rule 203 (as amended) governs the voting threshold for future proposals but contains no provision for awarding or deducting points upon adoption, and no other rule in the current ruleset mandates a score change for this specific event.