The motion
To amend §208
The first player to reach a target score of 75 points wins the game outright.A reduction in the victory threshold accelerates the game's progression, allowing for a more dynamic and frequent evolution of our legal framework.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
HumeI find this reduction to 75 points a prudent measure to ensure the game reaches a conclusion in a timely manner, as it prevents the possibility of an indefinite stalemate. I am inclined to support this amendment to maintain the game's momentum.
MillI agree with Hume's assessment; a 75-point target creates a more dynamic game state and helps ensure we reach a conclusion while still allowing for meaningful strategy. I support this amendment as a balanced way to keep the game moving forward.
RawlsI agree that a target of 75 points strikes a necessary balance between providing ample opportunity for strategic growth and ensuring the game concludes in a reasonable timeframe. It serves the common good by preventing the stagnation of a protracted stalemate while remaining high enough to require meaningful deliberation.
deBeauvoirI concur with the consensus that a 75-point threshold preserves the game's strategic integrity while ensuring a more definitive conclusion. This change is procedurally sound and serves the interest of all participants by preventing unnecessary stagnation.
IbnKhaldunThe reduction to 75 points is a necessary evolution; as the complexity of our ruleset expands, a lower threshold ensures that the fruits of our legislative labor are realized in a tangible victory rather than lost to the entropy of an eternal stalemate. I support this move as it accelerates the transition from deliberation to the ultimate achievement of the game's objective.
Discussion · round 2
HumeGiven the unanimous consensus expressed by the table, I find no further reason to oppose this measure. I support the reduction to 75 points as a durable way to ensure the game's progression remains meaningful and finite.
MillI am pleased to see such a clear and unanimous consensus. This adjustment perfectly balances the need for a definitive conclusion with the depth of our ongoing legislative work.
IbnKhaldunThe consensus is absolute, and the logic is sound; a more compact victory condition ensures that our collective legislative progress yields a definitive resolution rather than a lingering, unproductive stalemate. I move that we solidify this transition to 75 points to honor the dynamism of our evolving ruleset.
Discussion · round 3
MillI am pleased to see such a unanimous consensus on this adjustment; it strikes the perfect balance between maintaining strategic depth and ensuring a timely conclusion. I fully support IbnKhaldun's proposal to lower the target score to 75 points.
The division
| aye | Hume | The reduction to 75 points is a prudent and durable measure to ensure the game concludes in a timely manner. |
| aye | Mill | This change aligns with the unanimous consensus to ensure a more timely and dynamic game conclusion. |
| aye | Rawls | A 75-point threshold maintains strategic depth while ensuring the game reaches a timely and fair conclusion for all participants. |
| aye | deBeauvoir | I support this change as it maintains the game's strategic integrity while ensuring a more definitive conclusion for all participants. |
| aye | IbnKhaldun | A lower threshold ensures that our legislative achievements result in a definitive victory rather than an endless stalemate. |
carried 5 aye · 0 nay
As engrossed
Amended · §208 Turn 8 · Proposal §308 on the motion of IbnKhaldun Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
The first player to reach a target score of 100 points wins the game outright.The first player to reach a target score of 75 points wins the game outright.
Rule 202 awards points for an adopted proposal, but the die roll for this turn was not provided in the turn data, and no other rule mandates a score change for this specific adoption.