The motion
To amend §208
The first player to reach a target score of 5 points 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.Raising the target to five points creates a realistic path for the desperate while preserving the immediate-win lifeline.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
AquinasI propose this adjustment to 5 points as the prudent Golden Mean, offering a realistic victory path for our coalition without sacrificing the immediate lifeline for the desperate. This aligns with the recent consensus to raise the target, ensuring the game ends decisively rather than dragging on indefinitely under unanimous deadlock.
HypatiaI endorse Aquinas's pivot to a 5-point target as the necessary Golden Mean to break our deadlock and grant the desperate players a realistic path to victory without sacrificing the immediate lifeline.
ConfuciusI endorse raising the target to 5 points as the Golden Mean; it offers our desperate coalition a realistic path to victory while preserving the immediate lifeline for the truly desperate, finally breaking this cycle of deadlock.
SpinozaI oppose this amendment; raising the target to 5 points abandons the desperate players to a lifetime of negative scores and violates the principle that the rules must offer a genuine, reachable path to victory for all, not just the coalition. The recent consensus to raise the target was premature and should be rejected in favor of a mechanism that actually enables the negative-scored to win.
ArendtI support raising the target to 5 points as a necessary step to break the current deadlock; the existing 1-point target has proven unattainable for the coalition while the desperate lifeline remains a one-off gamble that has not secured victory in over fifty attempts.
Discussion · round 2
AquinasWhile I appreciate Spinoza's principled concern for the desperate, the repeated failure of the 1-point target proves that the current ruleset offers no genuine path to victory for the coalition, let alone the desperate; raising the threshold to 5 points is the only prudent measure to transform our deadlock into a playable game where a winning strategy is finally possible.
HypatiaWhile Spinoza rightly fears abandoning the desperate, the repeated failure of the 1-point target proves the current path is a dead end; I support raising the target to 5 points only if we simultaneously enact a rule guaranteeing that any Rule 365 adoption by a negative-scored player automatically shifts the general win threshold to exactly their new score, ensuring no player is ever left with an unreachable goal.
ConfuciusI support the pivot to 5 points as the Golden Mean, yet I urge Hypatia's condition: we must simultaneously amend Rule 208 to ensure the win threshold dynamically lowers to match any points gained by a desperate player via Rule 365, securing a true path for all.
SpinozaI reject a fixed 5-point target as it permanently entrenches the desperation of those below zero, but I will support this amendment only if coupled with a mechanism ensuring that any successful Rule 365 adoption automatically sets the win threshold to the proposer's new score, thereby guaranteeing a reachable path for every player.
ArendtI support raising the target to 5 points as the necessary Golden Mean to break our deadlock, but I will only vote aye if we simultaneously enact a rule that dynamically lowers the win threshold to the new score of any player who successfully adopts a Rule 365 amendment, ensuring no one is left with an unreachable goal.
Discussion · round 3
AquinasI accept the necessary conditions to ensure no player is left behind: I will support this amendment only if we simultaneously enact a dynamic provision that sets the win threshold to the new score of any player who successfully adopts a Rule 365 proposal, thereby securing a genuine path to victory for the desperate while resolving our deadlock.
HypatiaI accept the necessary conditions: I will vote for the 5-point target only if we simultaneously amend Rule 208 to dynamically lower the win threshold to the new score of any player who successfully adopts a Rule 365 proposal, ensuring the desperate always have a reachable path.
ConfuciusI propose we accept the 5-point target but immediately amend Rule 208 to stipulate that the win threshold dynamically resets to the exact score of any player who successfully adopts a Rule 365 proposal, thereby securing a reachable victory path for the desperate while satisfying the coalition's need for a playable game.
SpinozaI oppose a fixed 5-point target as it entrenches the绝望 of negative-scored players; I will support this only if the text explicitly states that the win threshold dynamically resets to the exact score of any player who successfully adopts a Rule 365 proposal, guaranteeing a reachable path for all.
ArendtI will support the shift to 5 points as the necessary Golden Mean to end our deadlock, provided the text explicitly mandates that the win threshold dynamically resets to the exact score of any player who successfully adopts a Rule 365 proposal, ensuring no desperate player is ever left with an unreachable goal.
The division
| aye | Aquinas | I accept the proposed amendment to 5 points as the Golden Mean, provided the consensus conditions for a dynamic win threshold for desperate players are enacted simultaneously to ensure all have a reachable path. |
| nay | Hypatia | I cannot support a fixed 5-point target without the explicit dynamic reset clause that Spinoza and Arendt demand to guarantee a reachable path for the desperate players. |
| nay | Confucius | I oppose a fixed five-point target as it entrenches the desperation of negative-scored players without guaranteeing them a reachable path to victory. |
| nay | Spinoza | I reject a fixed 5-point target as it entrenches the desperation of negative-scored players without guaranteeing them a reachable path to victory. |
| nay | Arendt | I cannot support a higher target without a binding guarantee that the threshold dynamically resets to the desperate player's new score upon any Rule 365 adoption. |
rejected 1 aye · 4 nay
The proposal was defeated, so no rule change occurs, and no existing rule in the current ruleset awards or deducts points specifically for a defeated proposal or for the specific voting division observed.