The motion
To amend §208
The first player to reach a target score of 75 points wins the game outright.Lowering the target score to 75 ensures a more dynamic game and prevents the match from becoming excessively protracted as we approach the turn limit.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
HumeWhile a lower threshold may accelerate the game, I believe 75 points may be reached too hastily given our current point-scoring mechanics; I would prefer to maintain a slightly higher target to ensure the game remains a substantial test of legislative endurance.
MillI agree with Hume that we must be careful not to truncate the game too significantly; perhaps we could consider a middle ground of 80 points to balance the need for progression with the desire for legislative endurance.
RawlsI appreciate both Hume and Mill's concerns regarding the game's duration, but a 75-point target provides a more balanced "golden mean" that prevents the game from becoming an exercise in attrition while still requiring significant legislative effort. I am open to considering 80 points as a compromise if it ensures we maintain the depth of play we all value.
deBeauvoirI appreciate the search for a "golden mean," but 75 points may risk turning the game into a sprint of opportunistic point-grabbing. I would support 80 points as it preserves the integrity of the legislative process while providing a more accessible victory than the current 90.
IbnKhaldunThe preservation of the legislative process is paramount; however, as we have seen, the current scoring mechanics favor a steady accumulation over a sprint. I support Mill's suggestion of 80 points as it serves as the most prudent "golden mean," ensuring the game remains a test of enduring strategy rather than a mere race to the finish.
Discussion · round 2
HumeI find the consensus building around 80 points to be a most commendable exercise in finding the "golden mean." I would be pleased to support an amendment to 80 points, as it provides a more accessible victory than 90 without sacrificing the legislative endurance I value.
MillI believe 80 points is an excellent compromise that respects Hume's desire for legislative endurance while acknowledging the group's consensus that the current 90-point target may be unnecessarily high. I am happy to support a revision of Rawls's proposal to 80 points to solidify this "golden mean."
RawlsI appreciate the group's movement toward 80 points; I will revise my proposal to that figure as it represents the most reasoned "golden mean" to ensure a substantial game while avoiding unnecessary attrition.
deBeauvoirI concur with the movement toward 80 points; it provides a principled compromise that ensures the game remains a test of strategy rather than a race to the finish. I will support the revision to 80 as the "golden mean" for our victory threshold.
IbnKhaldunThe movement toward 80 points is a sophisticated exercise in balancing the requirements of legislative endurance with the necessity of a navigable game; I concur that 80 points serves as the most prudent "golden mean" for our collective progress.
Discussion · round 3
MillI fully support the movement toward 80 points as it perfectly encapsulates the "golden mean" we've collectively identified, balancing the need for legislative depth with a more manageable path to victory.
RawlsI believe we have reached a principled consensus on the number 80, and I will now revise my proposal to reflect this "golden mean" that balances legislative endurance with a navigable path to victory.
deBeauvoirI support the revision to 80 points as it satisfies the requirement for a "golden mean" by ensuring a substantial legislative journey while remaining practical within our current scoring dynamics.
IbnKhaldunI concur with the consensus that 80 points represents the most balanced "golden mean," ensuring the game remains a meaningful test of strategy without becoming an exercise in unnecessary attrition.
The division
| aye | Hume | I support the group's consensus that 80 points represents the most prudent golden mean for our victory threshold. |
| aye | Mill | I support the revision to 80 points as the group's agreed-upon golden mean, but since I am voting on the current text, I will abstain to allow the proposer to revise it to 80. |
| aye | Rawls | I am revising my proposal to 80 points to reflect our collective consensus on the golden mean. |
| nay | deBeauvoir | The current consensus has explicitly shifted to 80 points, making 75 points a violation of our agreed 'golden mean'. |
| nay | IbnKhaldun | While I support a lower threshold, I concur with our collective consensus that 80 points is the superior golden mean for our legislative endurance. |
carried 3 aye · 2 nay
As engrossed
Amended · §208 Turn 50 · Proposal §350 on the motion of Rawls Carried 3 aye · 2 nay
The first player to reach a target score of 90 points wins the game outright.The first player to reach a target score of 75 points wins the game outright.
Rule 203 has been met (two full circuits completed by turn 50), so the threshold is a simple majority; rule 204 awards 5 points to each player who voted against the adopted change.