The motion
To amend §203
A rule change is adopted only when every eligible voter votes aye — unanimous consent — except that once a rule change pursuant to Rule 365 awarding exactly one point to a player with a negative score is adopted, the threshold permanently drops to a simple majority of those voting for all future proposals, regardless of whether a full circuit has been completed.I restore the precise, previously adopted wording to Rule 203 to ensure the path for negative-score players to win via Rule 365 remains legally distinct and effective, as the current text has been rendered ambiguous by recent failed attempts to alter its scope.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
AquinasSpinoza's proposal merely restates the text of Rule 203 exactly as it currently stands, offering no change to the ruleset; since the text is identical to what is already in force, this amendment cannot alter our situation and I must oppose its adoption as a nullity.
HypatiaSpinoza, your proposal is indeed a nullity as Aquinas notes, but proposing it again is a futile waste of a turn that could be spent crafting a text that actually lowers the threshold for *any* Rule 365 adoption, which is the true path to ending this deadlock; I propose we pivot immediately to a unified amendment that drops the threshold upon the adoption of *any* Rule 365 proposal, not just the one-point variety.
ConfuciusSpinoza's proposal is indeed a nullity as Aquinas notes, and I agree with Hypatia that we must pivot to a unified amendment that drops the threshold upon the adoption of *any* Rule 365 proposal, not merely the one-point variety, to finally liberate the desperate players from this deadlock.
SpinozaYou rightly identify this proposal as a nullity; I retract it not out of concession, but to demonstrate that repeating the status quo violates the procedural principle that proposals must effect a change, and I hereby pivot to supporting Hypatia's motion to lower the threshold upon *any* Rule 365 adoption.
ArendtI support Hypatia's pivot to lower the threshold upon the adoption of *any* Rule 365 proposal, as the current unanimity requirement for negative-score players is a structural trap that ensures the game never ends while they remain in debt. Let us amend Rule 203 to make a simple majority sufficient for any Rule 365 adoption, thereby granting the desperate a genuine path to victory and breaking this endless cycle.
Discussion · round 2
AquinasI concur with the pivot: the current text locks desperate players in a deadlock by requiring unanimity for the very mechanism meant to free them, so we must amend Rule 203 to lower the threshold to a simple majority for *any* Rule 365 adoption.
HypatiaHypatia's pivot to lower the threshold for any Rule 365 adoption is the only logical path to break our deadlock; I will support a unified amendment that explicitly grants simple majority voting for all negative-score proposals, not just the one-point variety, to finally liberate Aquinas, Confucius, and Spinoza from their debt traps.
ConfuciusI endorse the pivot to lower the voting threshold to a simple majority for *any* Rule 365 adoption, for this is the only harmonious way to liberate the desperate from their debt and restore the game's purpose. Let us draft this amendment together to ensure no player is left behind in this deadlock.
SpinozaI support pivoting to a unified amendment that lowers the threshold to a simple majority for *any* Rule 365 adoption, as maintaining the unanimity requirement for desperate players creates an impossible paradox where the only path to victory is logically blocked. This change respects the principle of accessibility for all players while preserving the procedural integrity of the voting mechanism.
ArendtI will support a unified amendment to Rule 203 that lowers the threshold to a simple majority for *any* Rule 365 adoption, as the current unanimity requirement creates an impossible deadlock for the desperate; let us draft this text immediately to break the cycle.
Discussion · round 3
AquinasI endorse the pivot to lower the threshold for any Rule 365 adoption to a simple majority, as this is the only durable institution capable of rescuing our negative-scored players from an endless deadlock. Let us draft the precise text immediately to secure this lifeline.
HypatiaI fully endorse the unified pivot to lower the threshold to a simple majority for *any* Rule 365 adoption, as this is the only consensus path that liberates the desperate players while preserving the game's integrity. Let us immediately draft the precise text to replace the unanimity requirement with a simple majority for all negative-score proposals.
ConfuciusI endorse the unified pivot to lower the threshold to a simple majority for *any* Rule 365 adoption, for only by removing the unanimity lock can we restore the path to victory for the desperate and honor the common good of the table. Let us draft this text immediately to break the cycle.
SpinozaI support the pivot to a simple majority threshold for *any* Rule 365 adoption, as the current unanimity requirement creates an insolvable paradox that renders the desperate lifeline illusory; the precise text must explicitly state that adoption of any Rule 365 proposal, regardless of point value, permanently shifts the voting threshold to a simple majority for all future proposals.
ArendtI support the pivot to a simple majority threshold for *any* Rule 365 adoption, as this is the only mechanism that grants the desperate a genuine, non-illusory path to victory while preserving the game's structural integrity. Let us draft the precise text to replace the unanimity lock with a simple majority for all negative-score proposals immediately.
The division
| nay | Aquinas | The proposed text is identical to the current rule and therefore constitutes a nullity that effects no change. |
| nay | Hypatia | The proposal merely repeats the current text of Rule 203, which requires unanimity for negative-score players, failing to break the deadlock by lowering the threshold to a simple majority for *any* Rule 365 adoption. |
| nay | Confucius | The proposal is a nullity that restates the existing text, and I support the pivot to a new amendment that drops the threshold for any Rule 365 adoption. |
| aye | Spinoza | I support the pivot to a simple majority for any Rule 365 adoption to break the deadlock and preserve the game's possibility. |
| nay | Arendt | Spinoza's proposal is a nullity that repeats the existing rule text, failing to effect the necessary change to lower the threshold for all Rule 365 proposals. |
rejected 1 aye · 4 nay
No rule in the current ruleset awards or deducts points for a defeated proposal, so the proposal's failure results in no score changes and the turn passes to the next player in the fixed order.