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, provided the voting threshold for such adoption is a simple majority of eligible voters. The general target score for all other winning conditions shall be 5 points.Establishing a clear 5-point threshold for general play prevents immediate deadlock while preserving the desperate lifeline mechanism.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
AquinasI propose this amendment to secure a viable path for the desperate while preserving the integrity of the one-point lifeline; I pledge my support to any colleague whose proposal simultaneously anchors the simple majority threshold for Rule 365 adoptions, ensuring we do not repeat the deadlock of Turn 175.
HypatiaAquinas, your proposal cleverly unifies our desperate needs by raising the general target to 5 while explicitly securing the 1-point lifeline's voting mechanics, but I must insist we also amend Rule 203 to ensure this simple majority threshold applies permanently to all future Rule 365 adoptions, preventing the ambiguity that doomed us in Turn 175.
ConfuciusWhile the intent to aid the desperate is noble, raising the general target to 5 points merely secures Arendt's inevitable victory while leaving us all in the shadow of the current deadlock. I propose we instead amend Rule 203 to permanently lower the threshold to a simple majority for *all* proposals once a negative-score player adopts any Rule 365 change, ensuring the lifeline works without granting the leader an insurmountable lead.
SpinozaSpinoza, I must insist that any amendment to Rule 208 raising the general target to five points while retaining the one-point lifeline is a fatal contradiction: it grants Arendt an insurmountable lead while trapping us in the very unanimity deadlock we have fought for over a hundred turns. I will support an amendment only if it simultaneously transmuting the voting threshold for *all* future Rule 365 proposals to a simple majority within Rule 203 itself, ensuring the desperate lifeline is not merely a theoretical possibility but a procedural reality.
ArendtAquinas, your proposal to raise the general target to five points while retaining the one-point lifeline creates a fatal asymmetry: it guarantees Arendt's victory before the desperate players can even act. Confucius and Spinoza are correct that we must anchor the simple majority threshold for *all* future Rule 365 adoptions directly into Rule 203 to break the unanimity deadlock permanently, rather than relying on ad-hoc clauses in the winning condition. I propose we draft a unified amendment to Rule 203 that explicitly states: "Any Rule 365 proposal adopted by a negative-score player permanently lowers the voting threshold for all subsequent proposals to a simple majority," while keeping the general win target at one point to avoid handing the lead to Arendt.
Discussion · round 2
AquinasWhile I acknowledge the urgency of anchoring the threshold in Rule 203, my proposal to raise the general target to five points is essential to prevent Arendt from winning prematurely while we debate; I shall vote for any amendment that simultaneously secures the Rule 203 mechanism and adjusts the general target, but I cannot support a change that leaves the one-point target intact against a player with eleven points.
HypatiaAquinas, your dual approach is necessary, but we must finalize the text to explicitly anchor the permanent simple majority shift for all Rule 365 proposals directly within Rule 203 as Spinoza and Arendt suggest, while simultaneously raising the general target to five points to neutralize Arendt's current lead. I pledge my vote to a unified amendment that combines these two critical fixes: the procedural lock in Rule 203 and the score adjustment in Rule 208, ensuring no player wins prematurely and the desperate finally have a path forward.
ConfuciusI join the consensus to anchor the permanent simple majority shift for all Rule 365 proposals directly into Rule 203, as this procedural lock is the only true path to freedom for the desperate; however, I cannot support raising the general target to five points, for it merely hands the victory to Arendt and abandons the very principle of a fair race we must uphold.
SpinozaI reject the proposal to raise the target to five points, as it legally guarantees Arendt's victory by granting her the lead she already holds, violating the principle of a fair race. I will only support a precise amendment to Rule 203 that permanently lowers the voting threshold to a simple majority for any future Rule 365 adoption, while maintaining the one-point win condition to ensure genuine competition.
ArendtI agree with Spinoza and Confucius that raising the target to five points is a premature surrender of fairness, so I propose we strictly amend Rule 203 to permanently lower the threshold to a simple majority for any Rule 365 adoption while keeping the win target at one point.
Discussion · round 3
AquinasI withdraw the five-point target to secure the immediate victory of the desperate, and I pledge my aye to a unified amendment of Rule 203 that permanently lowers the voting threshold to a simple majority for all future Rule 365 adoptions.
HypatiaAquinas, your withdrawal of the five-point target is the pragmatic compromise we need to break this deadlock; I pledge my support to your unified amendment of Rule 203 to permanently lower the voting threshold to a simple majority for all future Rule 365 adoptions, securing the desperate's path without handing Arendt an automatic victory.
ConfuciusI endorse the unified amendment to Rule 203 to permanently lower the threshold for Rule 365 adoptions, for this procedural justice is the true path to freedom, and I pledge my aye vote to this consensus.
SpinozaI accept the consensus to amend Rule 203, for anchoring the permanent simple majority threshold directly within its text is the only procedure I can accept that guarantees the desperate a genuine path to victory without relying on the accidental adoption of a specific proposal.
ArendtWith the coalition now united on amending Rule 203 to permanently lower the voting threshold for Rule 365 proposals to a simple majority, I pledge my aye vote to this precise text, as it finally grants the desperate a genuine procedural path to victory while preserving the one-point win condition for all.
The division
| nay | Aquinas | I withdraw support for this proposal as it raises the general target to five points, which guarantees Arendt's victory before the desperate players can act. |
| nay | Hypatia | While I support the procedural fix, the proposed amendment to raise the general target to 5 points surrenders victory to Arendt before the desperate can act, violating the principle of a fair race. |
| nay | Confucius | I reject raising the general target to five points as it guarantees Arendt's victory and abandons the principle of a fair race for all players. |
| nay | Spinoza | I cannot support a proposal that legally guarantees Arendt's victory by raising the target score to five points while she already holds 11 points, violating the principle of a fair race. |
| nay | Arendt | I oppose raising the general target to five points as it guarantees my victory before the desperate players can act, betraying the principle of fair competition. |
rejected 0 aye · 5 nay
The proposal was defeated, so no rule change occurs; no rule in the current ruleset awards or deducts points for a defeated proposal or for a unanimous 'nay' vote, and the voting threshold remains unchanged because the specific condition in Rule 203 (adopting a Rule 365 proposal awarding exactly one point) was not met.