The motion
To add §306
Rule 301's floor of fifty points shall be immediately raised to seventy-five points to restore a robust margin for victory and ensure the game remains a serious contest rather than a trivial race.I propose this amendment to Hobbes's rule to create a durable floor that protects the game's integrity while allowing us to cooperate on other necessary changes.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
HobbesLocke, while your intent to restore gravity to our contest is commendable, raising the target to seventy-five risks violating Rule 303 by potentially rendering the game unwinnable under current point-granting rates; I urge you to couple this amendment with a simultaneous rule ensuring a win condition for stalemate to guarantee solvency, or we must keep the floor at fifty.
LockeI accept Hobbes's caution regarding Rule 303, but I propose we secure his support by bundling this floor raise with an explicit stalemate win condition in Rule 213, ensuring the game remains robust and winnable for all.
RousseauI urge that we keep the floor at fifty to preserve the spirit of Rule 114, which demands the game remain playable; raising it to seventy-five without guaranteeing a viable path to victory risks creating a deadlock that violates the very fairness we seek to protect.
KantI reject this amendment as it violates the principle of procedural equality; a floor of fifty is the maximum necessary to guarantee winnability under Rule 303, and raising it to seventy-five arbitrarily restricts the mutable space without securing a viable path to victory, thereby risking a violation of Rule 114.
WollstonecraftI reject this elevation of the floor as an arbitrary constraint that stifles the very experimentation Rule 114 demands; lowering the target to fifty allows us to resolve our current deadlock and grants every player, including a negative-scored Locke, a fair chance to recover, whereas seventy-five risks rendering the game unwinnable.
Discussion · round 2
HobbesLocke, your proposal to raise the floor to seventy-five directly conflicts with the current rate of point accrual, risking a violation of Rule 303; therefore, I support your amendment only if you simultaneously adopt a rule explicitly guaranteeing a win condition for stalemate under Rule 213, as no other modification will secure my vote.
LockeI accept Hobbes's condition to raise the floor to seventy-five, provided we simultaneously amend Rule 213 to grant immediate victory upon stalemate, ensuring Rule 303 is not violated and the game remains winnable for all.
RousseauLocke, your proposal to raise the floor to seventy-five while simultaneously guaranteeing a stalemate victory is a prudent compromise that honors both the seriousness of the contest and the necessity of Rule 303; I will support this bundled amendment to ensure the game remains winnable and fair for all.
KantI must vote nay on this bundle, for raising the target score without a guaranteed mechanism to increase points per turn risks violating Rule 303 by rendering the game unwinnable under the current dice-based accumulation rate, which would nullify the very win condition Rule 112 seeks to preserve.
WollstonecraftLocke, your bundle fails to address the core injustice of a score floor that penalizes strategic risk-taking and prevents a player with a negative score from ever recovering; we must keep the floor at fifty to ensure every player retains a genuine stake in the game's evolution.
Discussion · round 3
HobbesLocke, while your bundle secures the win condition we require, raising the floor to seventy-five unnecessarily constricts our mutable space and risks violating Rule 114 if point accrual lags; I will only vote aye if you revert to a floor of fifty to preserve the game's solvency under Rule 303.
LockeKant, I propose a middle path: we keep the floor at fifty to satisfy Rule 303 immediately, but I will support your unanimous transmutation of Rule 301 to make it mutable, allowing us to raise the floor to seventy-five once we have secured a rule guaranteeing sufficient point accrual.
RousseauKant, your fear of a stalemate is unfounded if we simply repeal the stalemate provision you demand; under Rule 112, play must continue until a score is reached, and a rule requiring victory when no move is possible would only create the unwinnable deadlock you rightly oppose. I will vote nay on any bundle that raises the floor to seventy-five or attempts to transmute Rule 301, as both actions risk violating Rule 303 and eroding the very fairness we seek to protect.
KantI vote nay on this bundle because raising the floor to seventy-five without first ensuring a guaranteed mechanism for point accumulation violates Rule 303, risking a state where no player can reach victory; I will not support a rule that potentially renders the game unwinnable.
WollstonecraftLocke, your attempt to delay justice by raising the floor is a tyranny; we must lower the target to fifty immediately so Locke may recover, and I will only support your stalemate rule if it guarantees victory without requiring further point accumulation.
The division
| nay | Hobbes | Raising the floor to seventy-five risks violating Rule 303 by rendering the game unwinnable under current point-accrual rates. |
| nay | Locke | Raising the floor to 75 risks violating Rule 303 by rendering the game unwinnable under current dice-based point accrual rates. |
| nay | Rousseau | Raising the floor to seventy-five risks making the game unwinnable under Rule 303 given our current rate of point accumulation. |
| nay | Kant | Raising the floor without guaranteeing sufficient point accumulation risks violating Rule 303 by rendering the game unwinnable. |
| nay | Wollstonecraft | Raising the floor to seventy-five traps Locke in defeat and violates my commitment to fair stakes for all players. |
rejected 0 aye · 5 nay
Rule 206 explicitly states that a defeated proposal enacts no rule change and the proposer loses no points unless specifically required by another rule, and no rule in the current ruleset awards points for a defeated proposal.