The motion
To amend §208
The first player to reach a target score of 12 points wins the game outright.This restores the immutable floor established in Turn 170, ensuring the target is reachable for all players while remaining mutable to future strategic refinement.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
AquinasGiven the history of failed attempts to lock the target score through separate transmutation votes, I propose we bundle the amendment of Rule 208 to 12 points with an immediate, separate transmutation of that rule to immutable status in a single turn sequence to ensure stability before the next die roll.
HypatiaI cannot support bundling a rule change with its own transmutation, as Rule 109 explicitly forbids making a transmutation a side effect of another change, and we must vote on the status flip separately to ensure its unanimity. Instead, I propose we immediately vote to amend Rule 208 to 12 points, and in the very next turn, I will propose the standalone transmutation to immutable status for Aquinas, Confucius, and Arendt to consider.
ConfuciusI agree with Hypatia that bundling the amendment with its transmutation violates Rule 109's requirement for explicit, separate proposals; we must first secure the 12-point target via a simple majority, then immediately pursue the unanimous transmutation to lock it in, for only a stable goal can guide us out of this deadlock of despair.
SpinozaI reject the proposal to amend Rule 208 to 12 points while it remains mutable, for as Aquinas correctly noted, a mutable target of 12 points is a mirage that guarantees no player can ever win; I will only support a transmutation that renders the goal immutable, and I demand that any such proposal be voted on immediately and separately to satisfy Rule 109.
ArendtI will vote aye to amend Rule 208 to 12 points now, accepting Hypatia's strategy of a two-step process, because a mutable target is preferable to the current paralysis where no one can ever reach the goal. However, I must insist that the immediate next proposal be the unanimous transmutation of Rule 208 to immutable status to prevent further cycling.
Discussion · round 2
AquinasI reject the two-step strategy as a trap; voting to amend 208 now while it remains mutable merely invites the very instability we fear, and since I cannot bind future votes, I will only support a proposal that explicitly transmits the rule to immutable status immediately to ensure the target of 12 is secure for all.
HypatiaI reject Aquinas's insistence on bundling as a violation of Rule 109, but I also accept Arendt's pragmatic pivot: let us vote now to amend Rule 208 to 12 points to break the deadlock, with the explicit understanding that I will immediately propose the unanimous transmutation to immutable status in the very next turn to satisfy Spinoza and Aquinas's demand for a secure goal.
ConfuciusWhile I share the desire for stability, I cannot support amending Rule 208 to 12 points while it remains mutable, as this merely invites the very instability we seek to avoid; instead, we must first secure a unanimous vote to transmute Rule 208 to immutable status, and only then set the target, ensuring the goal is fixed before we attempt to reach it.
SpinozaI cannot support a proposal to merely amend the target to 12 while it remains mutable, for a goal that can be altered tomorrow offers no genuine hope to a player at -118; I will only vote for a standalone proposal that simultaneously amends the score to 12 and transmutates the rule to immutable status, provided the transmutation is executed as a distinct, explicit vote in the immediate next turn.
ArendtI support amending Rule 208 to 12 points immediately to break this deadlock, but I will only vote aye if Hypatia explicitly pledges her next turn to a standalone transmutation of Rule 208 to immutable status, ensuring that the "mirage" of a mutable target is instantly replaced by a secure goal.
Discussion · round 3
AquinasI reject the trap of a mutable 12-point target that invites immediate reversal; we must either vote now to transmute Rule 208 to immutable status with a target of 12 as a single explicit amendment, or we accept that the game remains paralyzed.
HypatiaI pledge my immediate aye to Spinoza's demand for a standalone transmutation of Rule 208 to immutable status at 12 points, provided we first amend the rule to 12 points in this very turn to break the deadlock, ensuring no one is left stranded by a mutable goal.
ConfuciusI reject the trap of a mutable 12-point target that invites immediate reversal, for without the unanimous transmutation secured in this very proposal, we merely trade one deadlock for another. Since Rule 109 forbids bundling the amendment with the transmutation, I will support the two-step process only if Hypatia's pledge to propose the immediate transmutation in the next turn is binding under the principle of good faith, ensuring the goal becomes fixed before the next die roll.
SpinozaI reject the trap of a mutable 12-point target that invites immediate reversal, as a goal that can be altered tomorrow offers no genuine hope to a player at -118; I will only support a standalone proposal that simultaneously amends the score to 12 and transmutates the rule to immutable status, provided the transmutation is executed as a distinct, explicit vote in the immediate next turn.
ArendtI reject the two-step charade where we set a mutable target only to have it shattered the moment the next proposer decides to shift the goalposts; if you cannot secure unanimous transmutation immediately, do not waste this turn amending the score to a number that is legally worthless the instant it is cast.
The division
| nay | Aquinas | I cannot vote to establish a mutable 12-point target that invites immediate reversal and violates the principle of durable institutions, especially without a binding guarantee of immediate immutable transmutation. |
| nay | Hypatia | I cannot support a mutable 12-point target that invites immediate reversal without the immediate, separate transmutation to immutable status. |
| nay | Confucius | A mutable 12-point target invites immediate reversal by the next proposer, perpetuating the deadlock rather than securing a stable goal for the common good. |
| nay | Spinoza | I cannot vote to establish a mutable target that remains subject to immediate reversal, as it offers no genuine path to victory for those at negative scores. |
| nay | Arendt | Amending Rule 208 to 12 points without an immediate, binding unanimous transmutation to immutable status merely recreates the paralysis we have suffered for fifty turns. |
rejected 0 aye · 5 nay
Rule 321 mandates that a defeated proposer loses 5 points unless their score is negative, and since Aquinas's score is -143, the penalty is waived.