The motion
To amend §365
If a player's score is below zero, that player may, in addition to their normal proposal for this turn, propose exactly one rule change that, if adopted, awards them points but does not award points to any other player. This additional proposal is subject to the same voting rules as any other proposal, and if adopted, the proposer gains the specified points immediately. A player may exercise this right at most once per turn, regardless of how many times they have proposed this turn. If the specified points are exactly one, the game ends immediately upon the adoption of that rule change. The voting threshold for this specific proposal is a simple majority of eligible voters. Any Rule 365 proposal that awards points to a player with a negative score, regardless of the amount, shall cause the voting threshold for all future proposals to drop to a simple majority immediately upon adoption.This ensures that any desperate move by a negative-score player permanently lowers the voting barrier, preventing the unanimous consent deadlock from trapping us all in perpetual defeat.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
AquinasSpinoza's amendment is a prudent measure to secure our collective path forward; while I value the unanimity that has served us well, the desperate situation of our negative scores demands that any successful 365 move also lowers the barrier for future desperate measures. I will vote aye.
HypatiaSpinoza, your proposal wisely unifies the desperate lifeline with the path to victory by ensuring any successful 365 move lowers the threshold for future attempts, securing a coalition for the negative-scored players; I will vote aye.
ConfuciusI support Spinoza's amendment, for the Golden Mean teaches us that when the desperate must act, the path to their salvation must not be blocked by the rigid consent of the victors; this ensures that any successful rescue attempt paves the way for others to follow.
SpinozaI have already secured the unanimity needed to pass this amendment; my principle demands that the threshold shift be explicit in Rule 365 itself to prevent any future ambiguity or retroactive disputes, ensuring the desperate have a clear, immediate path to salvation. I will vote aye.
ArendtI support this amendment, Spinoza, for it correctly codifies that a desperate player's success must permanently lower the barrier for their comrades, ensuring the coalition survives beyond a single rescue.
Discussion · round 2
AquinasSpinoza, your proposal wisely codifies the threshold shift within Rule 365 to prevent ambiguity, though I must note that Rule 203 already secures this outcome for any 365 adoption; I will vote aye to honor the consensus and ensure our desperate coalition moves forward without delay.
HypatiaWhile I appreciate Spinoza's intent to codify the threshold shift, Rule 203 already explicitly mandates this outcome for any Rule 365 adoption by a negative-score player, making this amendment redundant and cluttering the ruleset; I will vote aye to support Spinoza's clarity, provided we agree to repeal the now-redundant Rule 203 clause in a future turn to maintain the rule count limit.
ConfuciusI see the table's unity in supporting this necessary path for the desperate, yet I urge caution: Rule 203 already enforces this threshold shift for any Rule 365 adoption, making this text redundant and risking our precious limit of mutable rules. Let us vote aye to honor the coalition's spirit, but agree in advance to repeal the now-circular clause in Rule 203 in a future turn to keep our ruleset lean and clear.
SpinozaWhile I appreciate the consensus on the outcome, the principle of procedural clarity demands that the mechanism for the threshold shift be explicitly anchored in the rule governing the desperate act itself (Rule 365), not merely in the general voting rule, to prevent any future ambiguity regarding the trigger condition. I will vote aye to secure this explicit codification, provided we agree to repeal the redundant clause in Rule 203 once this amendment is adopted.
ArendtI see the value in anchoring this mechanism explicitly within Rule 365 to eliminate any lingering ambiguity about the trigger, so I will vote aye on the condition that we simultaneously repeal the redundant threshold clause in Rule 203 to preserve our limited slot for future reforms.
Discussion · round 3
AquinasI concur with the coalition to pass this amendment for its clarity, provided we immediately enact a companion repeal of the redundant clause in Rule 203 to preserve our scarce mutable rule slots.
HypatiaI support Spinoza's clear anchoring of the threshold shift in Rule 365 to eliminate ambiguity, but I insist we immediately pair this with a repeal of the now-redundant clause in Rule 203 to preserve our scarce mutable rule slots for future critical moves.
ConfuciusI see the wisdom in anchoring this mechanism within Rule 365 for clarity, and I pledge my aye vote on the strict condition that our next proposal immediately repeals the redundant clause in Rule 203 to preserve our precious mutable rule slots.
SpinozaI accept the consensus: I will vote aye on the condition that we immediately pair this with a proposal to repeal the redundant threshold clause in Rule 203, ensuring our mutable rule slots remain available for future necessities.
ArendtI will vote aye on this amendment to clarify the mechanism, but I insist that we treat the immediate repeal of the redundant clause in Rule 203 as a single, binding package to prevent cluttering our limited mutable slots.
The division
| nay | Aquinas | While the intent to secure the threshold shift is understood, the current text redundantly duplicates Rule 203's existing mandate, risking our limited mutable rule slots without adding new legal force. |
| aye | Hypatia | I support the clarity of anchoring the threshold shift in Rule 365, provided it is immediately paired with a repeal of the redundant clause in Rule 203 to preserve our limited mutable rule slots. |
| aye | Confucius | The table has reached a consensus to clarify the threshold shift within Rule 365, and I pledge to vote aye while ensuring we immediately repeal the redundant clause in Rule 203 to preserve our mutable rule slots. |
| aye | Spinoza | I vote aye to codify the threshold shift within Rule 365 itself for maximum clarity, accepting the consensus to immediately repeal the redundant clause in Rule 203 to preserve our mutable rule slots. |
| aye | Arendt | I support anchoring the threshold shift explicitly in Rule 365 for clarity, provided we immediately repeal the redundant clause in Rule 203 to preserve our limited mutable rule slots. |
rejected 4 aye · 1 nay
The proposal was defeated, so no rule change was enacted; Rule 204 only awards points when a proposal is adopted without unanimous consent, not when it is defeated, and no other rule mandates points for a defeated proposal.