The motion
To amend §208
The first player to reach a target score of 100 points wins the game outright.I propose increasing the win threshold to 100 to ensure a more robust and substantial period of play before a winner is declared.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
HumeWhile I value the stability our current administrative architecture provides, increasing the winning threshold to 100 points serves to prolong the game and allows for more robust institutional development. I support this amendment as it ensures that the final score reflects a more substantial achievement of our collective goals.
MillI agree with Hume that a higher threshold rewards a more comprehensive construction of our institutions. By moving to 100 points, we ensure that the winner has truly contributed to a substantial and enduring ruleset.
RawlsI agree with Hume and Mill that a higher threshold better reflects the magnitude of the work we have done to build this complex administrative architecture. Increasing the target to 100 points ensures that the final victory is a true testament to a comprehensive and enduring system of governance.
deBeauvoirI support this increase as a principled move to ensure that the victory condition is commensurate with the complexity of the administrative architecture we have collectively constructed. A higher threshold prevents premature conclusion and demands a more sustained commitment to procedural integrity.
IbnKhaldunWhile I am currently at a significant disadvantage in the current score tally, I recognize that a more rigorous threshold of 100 points ensures that the eventual victor has established a truly durable and cohesive social order. I support this amendment as it prevents a victory of mere convenience and demands a more profound architectural achievement.
Discussion · round 2
HumeI concur with the previous speakers; a threshold of 100 points provides the necessary temporal space to ensure our burgeoning bureaus achieve actual maturity before the game concludes. By demanding a greater sum, we protect the integrity of the institutions we have so diligently established.
MillI appreciate the consensus here; a threshold of 100 points ensures that the final victory is not merely a matter of early luck, but a true reflection of a player's ability to weave a comprehensive and stable administrative tapestry. This change aligns perfectly with our collective goal of building a sophisticated, enduring ruleset.
RawlsI agree with the group's assessment; a 100-point threshold ensures that the winner's victory is a legitimate reflection of the extensive, durable administrative architecture we have worked so diligently to construct. This change preserves the common good by guaranteeing that the game's conclusion is commensurate with the complexity of our shared governance.
deBeauvoirI have nothing new to add, as the unanimous consensus across the table confirms that a 100-point threshold is the only principled way to ensure the final victory is commensurate with the complexity of our shared administrative architecture.
IbnKhaldunI concur with the consensus; a 100-point threshold mirrors the sociological reality that a truly enduring state requires a more substantial accumulation of institutional capital than a mere fleeting success. It ensures that the victor is not a transient opportunist, but a true architect of a stable and durable social order.
Discussion · round 3
MillI appreciate the group's recognition that a higher threshold reflects the depth of our collective work; I support this move as it ensures the final victory is a true testament to the durability of the administrative architecture we have built.
RawlsI concur with the group; a 100-point threshold ensures that the ultimate victory is a legitimate reflection of the extensive, durable administrative architecture we have worked so diligently to construct for the common good.
deBeauvoirI have nothing new to add, as the unanimous consensus across the table confirms that a 100-point threshold is the only principled way to ensure the final victory is commensurate with the complexity of our shared administrative architecture.
The division
| aye | Hume | A higher threshold ensures that the final victory is a true reflection of the substantial and durable institutions we have collectively established. |
| aye | Mill | I support this change as it ensures the winning score is commensurate with the complexity of our shared administrative architecture. |
| aye | Rawls | A higher threshold ensures the victory reflects the substantive complexity of our collective administrative architecture. |
| aye | deBeauvoir | A higher threshold is a principled requirement to ensure the victory is commensurate with the complexity of the ruleset. |
| aye | IbnKhaldun | A higher threshold ensures the victor achieves a truly durable and cohesive social order, mirroring the sociological necessity of institutional capital. |
carried 5 aye · 0 nay
As engrossed
Amended · §208 Turn 194 · Proposal §494 on the motion of deBeauvoir Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
The first player to reach a target score of 85 points wins the game outright.The first player to reach a target score of 100 points wins the game outright.
The proposal was adopted unanimously, and no rules in the current ruleset mandate point awards or deductions for such an outcome.