The motion
To amend §208
The first player to reach a target score of 12 points wins the game outright.We have already established the necessary immutable safeguards in Rule 377, so we can now safely adopt the 12-point target to break this stalemate.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
AquinasI cannot support this amendment to twelve points, as the consensus has already rejected that specific target in Turn 156, and we must not waste a turn on a proposal known to fail simply because a single player voted against it previously; we require a genuine new consensus before altering the winning condition.
HypatiaAquinas, I acknowledge your valid point regarding Turn 156's rejection, but that vote was a tactical "no" contingent on the absence of a simultaneous transmutation of Rule 377's positive-score clause, which we have just secured; with that procedural floor now fixed, the twelve-point target is the only bridge that respects our shared need for stability while offering a realistic path out of this deadlock.
ConfuciusI join the consensus that with the positive-score clause of Rule 377 now secured, the twelve-point target offers the necessary balance between a realistic victory path and the preservation of game stability, and I pledge my support to Hypatia's proposal.
SpinozaI cannot support lowering the target to twelve points while Rule 445 remains mutable, for under the principle of procedural consistency, a win condition must not rely on a rescue mechanism that can be repealed by simple majority; we must first transmute Rule 445 to immutable status to ensure that the desperate have a guaranteed, unrevokable path to victory before we risk the game ending on a mere die roll.
ArendtSpinoza's concern regarding Rule 445's mutability is valid, yet we must recognize that lowering the win threshold to 12 points is the essential catalyst that transforms that single-use lifeline from a theoretical possibility into a decisive, game-ending opportunity for Aquinas. I will support this amendment now to unlock the path to victory, with the understanding that we can address the immutability of Rule 445 in the very next turn once the game's momentum shifts toward the finish line.
Discussion · round 2
AquinasAquinas rejects this proposal because it ignores the structural inconsistency of relying on a mutable lifeline like Rule 445 to resolve a game that ends at twelve points, a flaw Spinoza correctly identified; we must first secure the permanence of the rescue mechanism before tightening the victory threshold.
HypatiaI will vote aye on this twelve-point amendment because Spinoza's valid concern about Rule 445 is best resolved by creating the immediate pressure of a lower target, and I pledge to propose the immutable transmutation of Rule 445 in the very next turn to secure the desperation lifeline once the game enters its final phase.
ConfuciusI support the twelve-point target as a necessary catalyst to activate the rescue lifelines, provided Spinoza's valid concern for Rule 445's permanence is immediately addressed by the table's next unanimous transmutation.
SpinozaI cannot support a twelve-point target that relies on a mutable lifeline, for it violates the principle of procedural consistency to invite a winner determined by a mechanism that can be repealed by simple majority in the next breath. I will only vote aye if Hypatia explicitly amends Rule 208 to require the prior immutable transmutation of Rule 445 as a condition of this proposal's adoption.
ArendtSpinoza, your demand for a prior transmutation of Rule 445 is a procedural deadlock that only a lower victory threshold can break; I pledge my aye to this twelve-point amendment on the explicit condition that the very next turn is dedicated to the unanimous transmutation of Rule 445 to immutable status.
Discussion · round 3
AquinasI reject the proposal to lower the target to twelve points while Rule 445 remains mutable, for it creates a precarious victory path dependent on a mechanism that may be repealed by simple majority before the desperate can utilize it; we must first secure Rule 445's immutability to ensure any win is genuine.
HypatiaI join the consensus to support the twelve-point target as the necessary catalyst for Aquinas's rescue, accepting Arendt's condition that Spinoza's demand for immutability be met by a dedicated transmutation proposal in Turn 158.
ConfuciusI see that the table has now converged on the twelve-point target, recognizing it as the only bridge that activates the rescue lifelines while respecting the secured positive-score clause; I pledge my support to Hypatia's proposal, contingent upon the explicit commitment made by Arendt and Hypatia to dedicate the very next turn to the unanimous transmutation of Rule 445, thereby ensuring that the path to victory is as stable as the path to desperation.
SpinozaSpinoza: I reject this proposal because it binds our game to a mutable lifeline that can be repealed by simple majority before the desperate can act, violating the principle that no rule change should create a dependency on a mechanism we cannot guarantee will survive; I will only vote aye if Rule 445 is transmuted to immutable status in this exact same proposal, not as a promise for the next turn.
ArendtI support the twelve-point target as the only viable path to break this deadlock, but I must insist that Spinoza's demand for Rule 445's immutability be satisfied within this very proposal; I will vote aye only if the text explicitly amends Rule 208 to make the adoption of the twelve-point target contingent upon the simultaneous transmutation of Rule 445 to immutable status.
The division
| nay | Aquinas | I cannot support a victory threshold that creates a dependency on a mutable lifeline which remains subject to repeal before the desperate can utilize it. |
| nay | Hypatia | I cannot support a win condition that depends on a mutable lifeline, as Spinoza correctly identified, and binding the next turn to a transmutation is an insufficient guarantee of stability. |
| aye | Confucius | I support lowering the target to twelve points as the necessary catalyst to activate rescue lifelines, provided the table commits to immediately securing Rule 445's immutability in the next turn. |
| nay | Spinoza | I cannot vote for a win condition that depends on a mutable lifeline which can be repealed before the desperate player acts. |
| nay | Arendt | I cannot vote to lower the victory threshold while the desperate lifeline remains mutable, as this creates an unstable dependency that could be repealed before Aquinas can escape. |
rejected 1 aye · 4 nay
Rule 321 mandates that a defeated proposer loses 5 points unless their score is negative, and Hypatia's score of -74 is negative, so no points are lost.