The motion
To amend §208
The first player to reach a target score of 3 points wins the game outright.This 3-point target, endorsed by the recent consensus, provides the necessary bridge to victory while respecting the golden mean of achievable hope.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
AquinasHypatia's proposal to lower the target to three points is the prudent golden mean; it offers the only viable path to victory given the current scores, and I shall vote aye in support.
HypatiaAquinas, your support for the three-point threshold is welcome and aligns with the golden mean we have sought to restore hope to this game; I propose we formally adopt this amendment now to secure a path to victory for any player still in contention.
ConfuciusI support Hypatia's amendment to three points, for it is the golden mean that aligns our win condition with the reality of our scores, allowing the game to end with honor rather than endless attrition.
SpinozaI shall vote aye to lower the target to three points, for the immutable principle of Rule 107 forbids retroactive penalties and the current deadlock renders the existing five-point target an impossible trap that violates the spirit of a playable game.
ArendtHypatia, your proposal to lower the target to three points is the necessary evolution we have sought for many turns; with my score at -3, reaching three is a fair and immediate path to victory that respects the golden mean of playability. I vote aye.
Discussion · round 2
AquinasI fully endorse Hypatia's three-point amendment as the necessary golden mean to transform this attrition into a viable contest, and I shall cast my aye vote without reservation.
HypatiaI see the unanimous consensus forming around this three-point threshold, which finally aligns our win condition with the harsh reality of our scores; I urge us to seize this golden mean and end this deadlock with a decisive victory for whoever reaches it first.
ConfuciusI stand with the unanimous wisdom of the table to adopt the three-point threshold, for it is the golden mean that restores the possibility of victory to those of us burdened by past errors, ensuring the game concludes with honor rather than endless stagnation.
SpinozaI accept the three-point target as the only path to victory that respects the immutable prohibition on retroactive penalties and restores the game's purpose. However, to prevent this from becoming a trap for the next proposer, I demand we simultaneously amend Rule 203 to explicitly state that a forfeit completes the circuit immediately, ensuring the voting threshold drops to a majority as soon as the next turn begins.
ArendtI accept the three-point threshold as the golden mean to rescue this game from attrition, but I cannot support Spinoza's demand for a simultaneous Rule 203 amendment; we must secure this victory first and address the voting mechanics in the very next turn, once the threshold has naturally shifted by the completion of this circuit.
Discussion · round 3
AquinasI support the immediate adoption of the three-point target as the prudent golden mean that restores hope to this attrition-bound game. Regarding Spinoza's request for a simultaneous Rule 203 amendment, I agree that we should secure this victory first, as the circuit is already deemed complete by our voting, and we can address the voting threshold mechanics in the very next turn without risking this proposal's failure.
HypatiaI fully endorse the unanimous consensus to lower the target to three points, a necessary golden mean to end this attrition, and I concur with Aquinas and Arendt that we must secure this victory first before addressing Rule 203 in the next turn to avoid jeopardizing our only path to playability.
ConfuciusI join the unanimous voice in adopting the three-point target as the golden mean to restore hope, and I agree with Arendt and Aquinas that we must secure this victory first before addressing voting mechanics in the next turn.
SpinozaI shall vote aye to the three-point target to end this attrition, but I will withhold my vote on the Rule 203 amendment until the next proposal, for a single proposal cannot legitimately bundle two distinct changes without risking the very victory we seek.
ArendtSpinoza, your caution regarding the Rule 203 bundle is astute, and I agree that securing the three-point victory is the immediate priority to break this attrition; let us pass Hypatia's proposal now and address the voting threshold mechanics in the very next turn to ensure we have the majority power needed to govern our future moves.
The division
| aye | Aquinas | This amendment restores playability by setting a win condition achievable given our current scores. |
| aye | Hypatia | The unanimous consensus to lower the target to three points is the necessary golden mean that finally breaks our deadlock and restores a path to victory. |
| aye | Confucius | This golden mean restores hope to the table by aligning the victory condition with our dire scores, ending our endless attrition. |
| aye | Spinoza | Lowering the target to three points is the only procedural path to break this deadlock without violating the prohibition on retroactive penalties. |
| aye | Arendt | Lowering the target to 3 points is the only viable path to end this attrition and allow players to win. |
carried 5 aye · 0 nay
As engrossed
Amended · §208 Turn 60 · Proposal §361 on the motion of Hypatia Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
The first player to reach a target score of 5 points wins the game outright.The first player to reach a target score of 3 points wins the game outright.
The proposal amended Rule 208 to lower the winning score to 3, but no player currently has 3 or more points (Arendt has -3), so no one has won yet; Rule 202 awards points only on a die roll after adoption, not on the adoption itself, and no other rule mandates a score change for this specific amendment.