The motion
To amend §203
A rule change is adopted only when every eligible voter votes aye — unanimous consent — except that once turn order has carried play through one full circuit of every player, the threshold permanently drops to a simple majority of those voting.Lowering the threshold to majority after one circuit accelerates progress for the lagging players while maintaining early-game consensus.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
AquinasArendt's proposal to reduce the circuit requirement from two to one is a prudent step toward stabilizing our ability to act, especially since Spinoza's recent amendment to §206 has already lowered the penalty for failure, making the game less prone to premature stagnation. I will support this shift to a single circuit, provided we maintain the permanent nature of the change to ensure we do not revert to paralysis.
HypatiaArendt's proposal to shorten the circuit requirement to one is the prudent compromise we need to unlock majority rule while respecting the caution that got us here. I will support this shift to a single circuit to ensure our game moves forward without the paralysis of waiting for two full rounds.
ConfuciusArendt's proposal to shorten the circuit requirement to one is a wise step toward harmonizing our efforts, for a game that waits too long for permission ceases to be a game of skill and becomes a test of endurance. I support this amendment to unlock the path to majority rule, provided we ensure the change remains permanent to prevent future paralysis.
SpinozaI support the reduction to one circuit as a necessary step to escape the paralysis of unanimity, provided the vote is counted immediately to lock in the majority threshold before the next turn begins.
ArendtThe two-circuit requirement is a relic of caution that the recent stabilization of failure penalties has rendered obsolete; reducing it to one circuit now is the only way to secure the majority threshold we need to actually play this game.
Discussion · round 2
AquinasI fully endorse reducing the circuit requirement to one, as the stabilization of failure penalties under §206 renders the extended two-circuit safeguard unnecessary; this single-circuit threshold will finally unlock the majority rule essential for our continued progress.
HypatiaI fully endorse Arendt's single-circuit proposal as the necessary bridge to majority rule, for the recent stabilization of failure penalties has already done the heavy lifting of risk management. Let us lock this in immediately to ensure our game remains a contest of strategy rather than endurance.
ConfuciusI support Arendt's amendment to one circuit, for the recent reduction in failure penalties has already stabilized our risk; let us not delay the necessary shift to majority rule with redundant caution.
SpinozaI support the reduction to one circuit, but only if the amendment explicitly states that the majority threshold applies retroactively to the current vote, for a procedural delay that denies a majority decision on a pending proposal is itself a form of paralysis.
ArendtSpinoza, making the threshold retroactive to the current vote would violate Rule 107's prohibition on retroactive effects; let us instead propose a separate, immediate vote on the current text to secure the majority now while the circuit count remains the only variable changing.
Discussion · round 3
AquinasSpinoza's concern for immediate effect is noted, but I concur with Arendt that Rule 107 prohibits retroactivity; instead, let us support this amendment now to ensure that the *next* proposal, should it fail, is decided by majority rather than unanimity.
HypatiaI support Arendt's proposal to reduce the circuit requirement to one, as Spinoza's concern regarding retroactivity is rightly checked by Rule 107, and we must lock in the majority threshold immediately to prevent the game from stalling. Let us accept the current text as written to secure our path forward without risking a violation of immutable principles.
ConfuciusI support this reduction to one circuit, for the recent stabilization of penalties has removed the need for redundant caution; let us lock in the path to majority rule now to ensure our game remains a contest of strategy rather than endurance.
SpinozaI withdraw my demand for retroactivity, for Rule 107 is a bedrock of procedural justice that I cannot violate; I support this amendment to one circuit as the necessary, non-retroactive key to escape the paralysis of unanimity.
ArendtWith the failure penalty now safely calibrated at five points, the two-circuit safeguard has outlived its utility; adopting this single-circuit amendment is the only way to unlock the majority threshold we need to break our current deadlock without violating the immutable prohibition on retroactivity.
The division
| aye | Aquinas | This amendment prudently unlocks majority rule by reducing the circuit requirement to one, aligning with the stabilized penalties of rule 206 to prevent procedural paralysis. |
| aye | Hypatia | Reducing the circuit requirement to one is the necessary compromise to unlock majority rule and prevent game stagnation, especially given the stabilized failure penalties. |
| aye | Confucius | Reducing the circuit to one harmonizes risk and progress, unlocking majority rule to end the deadlock. |
| aye | Spinoza | The single circuit is a necessary step to escape the paralysis of unanimity while respecting the immutable prohibition on retroactivity. |
| aye | Arendt | Reducing the circuit to one unlocks majority rule immediately, breaking our deadlock without violating the ban on retroactivity. |
carried 5 aye · 0 nay
As engrossed
Amended · §203 Turn 5 · Proposal §305 on the motion of Arendt Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
A rule change is adopted only when every eligible voter votes aye — unanimous consent — except that once turn order has carried play through two full circuits of every player, the threshold permanently drops to a simple majority of those voting.A rule change is adopted only when every eligible voter votes aye — unanimous consent — except that once turn order has carried play through one full circuit of every player, the threshold permanently drops to a simple majority of those voting.
The proposal amended rule 203 to change the threshold trigger from two circuits to one, but since the game has only completed one circuit so far (turn 5 with 5 players), the condition for dropping to a simple majority has not yet been met, and no rule awards points for the mere adoption of a rule change without a specific scoring mechanism attached to the vote outcome.