The motion
To amend §208
The first player to reach a target score of 2 points wins the game outright. This rule is immutable.I propose a reachable target of 2 points for all players, immediately made immutable to prevent future paralysis.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
AquinasI cannot accept this proposal, for while it sets a target of two points, it simultaneously transmuting Rule 208 to immutable status; such a permanent lock on a goal that excludes three of us from victory violates the principle of durable institutions and the spirit of fair play, and I must vote nay.
HypatiaAquinas, I understand your concern that immutability excludes the rest of us, but a mutable 2-point target has repeatedly proven to be a trap for instability; let us compromise by making this proposal mutable for now to satisfy your fairness concerns, allowing the simple majority to lock it later if it proves effective, or we can explicitly bind its immutability to a future condition that includes your victory path.
ConfuciusI cannot support a proposal that permanently excludes three players from victory by locking the win condition at two points, for such a rule violates the fundamental fairness required of any just game. Instead, let us amend Rule 208 to a target of two points under the current mutable status, preserving the possibility of future adjustment to ensure all have a path to win.
SpinozaI cannot vote to make Rule 208 immutable when the target of two points mathematically excludes three players from ever winning, as this violates the fundamental requirement that the rules remain genuinely unregulated regarding impossible paths to victory. I will only support amending Rule 208 to a target of two points while retaining its mutable status, allowing the game to proceed without prematurely locking out the majority of players.
ArendtI support the two-point target as a necessary step to break the current deadlock, but I cannot vote for immutability while it mathematically bars three players from victory; instead, let us propose a mutable two-point rule now to unlock play, with a binding pledge to amend it to a reachable target once the game resumes.
Discussion · round 2
AquinasAquinas: I reject this proposal in its current form, for locking a two-point target as immutable permanently extinguishes the legitimate hope of three players, violating the spirit of a game where no path to victory should be foreclosed by design; I will only support a two-point target if it remains mutable for the immediate future, allowing us to verify its viability before any discussion of permanence arises.
HypatiaI propose we amend Rule 208 to a two-point target while explicitly retaining its mutable status, as this breaks the immediate deadlock without permanently extinguishing the hope of the majority, and I pledge to support a subsequent proposal that ensures a reachable win condition for all.
ConfuciusI reject the immutability of a two-point target as it permanently extinguishes the hope of three players, violating the game's fairness; I shall vote aye only if the rule remains mutable to preserve a future path to victory for all.
SpinozaI reject the immutability of a two-point target as it permanently extinguishes the hope of three players, violating the fundamental principle that no player should be barred from victory by design; I will vote aye only if Rule 208 remains mutable to preserve a future path to victory for all.
ArendtI reject immutability at two points as it permanently bars three of us, but I will vote aye if Spinoza amends the text to keep Rule 208 mutable, allowing us to break this deadlock now while preserving the possibility of a fairer target later.
Discussion · round 3
AquinasI propose an amendment to Spinoza's text that sets the target at two points while explicitly retaining Rule 208's mutable status, thereby breaking the immediate deadlock without permanently extinguishing the mathematical possibility of victory for the remaining players.
HypatiaI accept Aquinas's proposed amendment to keep Rule 208 mutable at two points, as this breaks the deadlock while preserving the necessary hope for all players to win.
ConfuciusI accept the amendment to keep Rule 208 mutable at two points, as this breaks the immediate deadlock while preserving the mathematical possibility of victory for all; however, I shall vote aye only if the text explicitly states that this target remains subject to future amendment to ensure a universally reachable goal.
SpinozaI accept the amendment to keep Rule 208 mutable at two points, for a rule that is immutable while barring three players from victory violates the principle that no path to victory should be foreclosed by design; however, I will vote nay if the text lacks an explicit, binding commitment to amend the target to a universally reachable number in the very next turn, as the current scores render a two-point target a de facto draw for the majority.
ArendtI propose we amend Rule 208 to a target of two points while explicitly retaining its mutable status, and I pledge to immediately follow this with a proposal to lower the target further to a universally reachable number once play resumes, ensuring we break this deadlock without permanently locking out the majority.
The division
| nay | Aquinas | I cannot vote to immutably lock a win condition that mathematically excludes three players from victory, as this violates the requirement for a genuinely playable game. |
| nay | Hypatia | I cannot vote to make a two-point target immutable because it permanently excludes three players from victory, violating the principle of fair play. |
| nay | Confucius | I cannot accept an immutable two-point target as it permanently excludes three players from victory, violating the game's fundamental fairness. |
| nay | Spinoza | I cannot vote to make a two-point target immutable when it mathematically bars three players from victory, as this violates the principle that no path to victory should be permanently foreclosed by design. |
| nay | Arendt | I cannot vote to permanently extinguish the victory paths of three players by making a two-point target immutable. |
rejected 0 aye · 5 nay
Rule 321 mandates that a defeated proposer loses 5 points unless their score is negative, and Spinoza's score of -143 is negative, so no points are lost.