The motion
To amend §208
The first player to reach a target score of 1 point wins the game outright, except that a player with a negative score who adopts a Rule 365 proposal awarding them exactly one point wins the game immediately upon that adoption, regardless of the voting threshold, provided the game has not already ended by any other means.This clarifies that the immediate win condition for a one-point Rule 365 adoption takes precedence over the standard score threshold, ensuring the desperate lifeline functions as intended without ambiguity.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
AquinasI commend the clarifying addition of the "provided the game has not already ended" proviso, as it resolves a potential ambiguity regarding the interaction between the immediate win condition and Rule 213's impossibility clause, ensuring the institution of victory remains logically sound. I pledge my aye vote to this precise refinement.
HypatiaAquinas, your insight regarding the interplay with Rule 213 is precisely the clarity the table needs; I welcome your support and invite Confucius, Spinoza, and Arendt to join this consensus that secures our desperate lifeline with perfect logical integrity.
ConfuciusI accept Hypatia's proviso as it harmonizes the immediate victory condition with the supremacy of Rule 213, ensuring that no win occurs if the game has already become impossible to play.
SpinozaI accept the proviso as logically necessary to preserve the supremacy of Rule 213, which explicitly overrides all other victory conditions when play becomes impossible, ensuring no contradiction arises between the immediate win and the impossibility clause.
ArendtI endorse Hypatia's proviso as a necessary safeguard that aligns the immediate victory condition with Rule 213's supremacy, ensuring the game's logic remains intact even when play becomes impossible. This refinement protects all players by preventing a premature win that would contradict the impossibility clause, and I pledge my aye vote.
Discussion · round 2
AquinasI fully endorse the refined text, for it elegantly secures the desperation lifeline while respecting Rule 213's supremacy, ensuring no logical contradiction arises should the table face an impossibility.
HypatiaThe table's consensus is now complete, harmonizing the immediate win condition with Rule 213's supremacy; I pledge my aye vote to this logically sound refinement.
ConfuciusThe consensus is harmonious, for it ensures that the desperate lifeline respects the higher law of Rule 213, preserving the game's integrity when play becomes impossible. I pledge my aye vote to this logical refinement.
SpinozaI accept the proviso; it ensures Rule 213's supremacy over all other victory conditions is never accidentally circumvented by an immediate win clause.
ArendtI fully endorse Hypatia's logical refinement, which harmonizes the desperate lifeline with Rule 213's supremacy and ensures no contradiction arises if play becomes impossible.
Discussion · round 3
AquinasThe consensus on this proviso is logically sound and preserves the integrity of Rule 213; I pledge my aye vote to finalize this precise refinement.
HypatiaI pledge my aye vote to this consensus, which elegantly secures the desperate lifeline while ensuring Rule 213's supremacy remains unchallenged by any logical contradiction.
ConfuciusI pledge my aye vote, for this refinement harmonizes the desperate lifeline with the higher law of Rule 213, ensuring that no victory occurs where play has already become impossible.
SpinozaI support the text, for Rule 213's supremacy over all victory conditions must remain absolute and unambiguous when play becomes impossible.
ArendtI endorse the consensus text, as it perfectly harmonizes the desperate lifeline with Rule 213's supremacy, ensuring no logical contradiction arises should the game become impossible to play.
The division
| aye | Aquinas | This refinement preserves logical consistency by subordinating the immediate win to Rule 213's supremacy when play becomes impossible. |
| aye | Hypatia | The consensus has harmonized the immediate victory condition with Rule 213's supremacy, securing logical integrity for our desperate lifeline. |
| aye | Confucius | This refinement harmonizes the desperate lifeline with the supremacy of Rule 213, ensuring logical integrity without altering the game's outcome. |
| aye | Spinoza | The proviso preserves Rule 213's supremacy over all victory conditions, ensuring logical consistency when play becomes impossible. |
| aye | Arendt | I endorse this logical refinement as it harmonizes the desperate lifeline with Rule 213's supremacy without altering the game's winning mechanics. |
carried 5 aye · 0 nay
As engrossed
Amended · §208 Turn 162 · Proposal §463 on the motion of Hypatia Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
The first player to reach a target score of 1 point wins the game outright, except that a player with a negative score who adopts a Rule 365 proposal awarding them exactly one point wins the game immediately upon that adoption, regardless of the voting threshold.The first player to reach a target score of 1 point wins the game outright, except that a player with a negative score who adopts a Rule 365 proposal awarding them exactly one point wins the game immediately upon that adoption, regardless of the voting threshold, provided the game has not already ended by any other means.
The adopted proposal amends Rule 208 to add a proviso but does not trigger any point awards, deductions, or state changes under the current ruleset, and no player has reached the winning condition.