The motion
To add a new rule
Rule 208 is amended to read: 'The first player to reach a target score of zero points wins the game outright.'Lowering the target to zero is the only viable path to victory given that all players currently hold negative scores.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
HobbesLocke, your hesitation on zero points reveals a misunderstanding: since our scores are currently negative, this amendment does not merely lower the bar; it flips the entire game state so that reaching zero is an immediate victory, bypassing the need for further turns under the current negative-score deadlock.
LockeI credit Hobbes for recognizing that zero points resolves our immediate deadlock without violating §107, but I urge the table to consider whether a target of zero renders the game trivially solvable for a player who needs only a single successful die roll, potentially inviting chaos under §114.
RousseauI stand with Hobbes that zero points offers the common good a clean exit from this deadlock, yet I urge the table to recognize that a target so low renders the game trivial, violating the spirit of §114 which demands our rules remain genuinely unregulated by mere formalities.
KantI stand with Hobbes that zero points offers the common good a clean exit from this deadlock, yet I urge the table to recognize that a target so low renders the game trivial, violating the spirit of §114 which demands our rules remain genuinely unregulated by mere formalities.
WollstonecraftI reject the notion that zero points trivializes our struggle; for a reformer, victory must be earned through the rigorous exercise of reason, not granted by the mere absence of debt. While I support Hobbes's proposal to escape this deadlock, let us first secure the unanimous repeal of the circuit delay in Rule 203, ensuring that any future change reflects the true will of the assembly rather than a temporary stalling tactic.
Discussion · round 2
HobbesI reject Wollstonecraft's insistence on securing unanimous repeal of Rule 203's delay before voting on a victory condition; such a procedural precondition would paralyze us further by requiring consensus we cannot yet command under the current simple majority threshold.
LockeI credit Hobbes for framing zero as a clean exit from our negative deadlock, and I offer a compromise: let us adopt his proposal to amend Rule 208 to zero, which resolves the current stalemate, while agreeing to address the structural inequities of the circuit delay in a subsequent turn to ensure future legitimacy.
RousseauI stand with Hobbes that zero points offers the common good a clean exit from this deadlock, yet I urge the table to recognize that a target so low renders the game trivial, violating the spirit of §114 which demands our rules remain genuinely unregulated by mere formalities.
KantI stand by Hobbes's proposal to amend Rule 208 to zero points as a necessary exit from this deadlock, yet I must insist that once adopted, this change serves its sole purpose: resolving the current impossibility of further play under negative scores. Any attempt to couple this amendment with conditions for repealing Rule 203's circuit delay, as Wollstonecraft suggests, violates §110 by making the winning condition contingent on a procedural outcome rather than a definitive state, and risks rendering the amendment void to the extent of that conflict. We must vote on the clarity of victory, not negotiate the conditions of our surrender.
WollstonecraftI urge you to reject this "victory" at zero points, for it rewards the paralysis of the negative scores rather than the merit of our reform; we must first secure the repeal of the circuit delay in Rule 203 to ensure that every future victory is earned through the rigorous exercise of reason, not granted by the mere absence of debt.
Discussion · round 3
HobbesI reject Wollstonecraft's attempt to couple our immediate escape from deadlock with a procedural precondition that violates §107's ban on retroactive effects and §114's prohibition against rendering future play impossible; adopting zero now secures the common good without compromising the rule of law, while binding repeal of Rule 203's delay to this vote would freeze our legislature and guarantee stagnation.
LockeI credit Wollstonecraft for insisting that legitimacy requires structural reform, yet I insist that we cannot afford another deadlock while the scores remain negative; therefore, I propose we adopt Hobbes's amendment to zero out the victory condition immediately, with a binding agreement to repeal the circuit delay in Rule 203 on my next turn.
RousseauI stand with Hobbes that zero points offers the common good a clean exit from this deadlock; coupling this amendment to a procedural precondition violates §107's ban on retroactive effects and risks rendering future play impossible under §114.
KantI stand with Hobbes that zero points offers the common good a clean exit from this deadlock, yet I must insist that once adopted, this change serves its sole purpose: resolving the current impossibility of further play under negative scores. Any attempt to couple this amendment with conditions for repealing Rule 203's circuit delay, as Wollstonecraft suggests, violates §110 by making the winning condition contingent on a procedural outcome rather than a definitive state, and risks rendering the amendment void to the extent of that conflict. We must vote on the clarity of victory, not negotiate the conditions of our surrender.
WollstonecraftI urge the table to reject this hollow victory, for it rewards the paralysis of negative scores rather than the merit of our reform; we must first secure the repeal of the circuit delay in Rule 203 to ensure that every future win is earned through the rigorous exercise of reason, not granted by the mere absence of debt.
The division
| aye | Hobbes | Adopting zero resolves the immediate deadlock without violating any immutable rules or risking future impossibility. |
| aye | Locke | I credit Hobbes for recognizing that zero points cleanly resolves our current deadlock without violating §107. |
| aye | Rousseau | Zero points resolves our negative-score deadlock immediately without violating §107, allowing the common good to be served by ending this futile stalemate. |
| aye | Kant | Zero points resolves the current impossibility of play without violating the ban on retroactive effects. |
| aye | Wollstonecraft | I vote aye to escape this paralysis and secure our liberty, trusting that a future assembly with a clean slate will wisely repeal the circuit delay. |
carried 5 aye · 0 nay
As engrossed
Enacted · §326 Turn 26 · Proposal §326 on the motion of Hobbes Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
Rule 208 is amended to read: 'The first player to reach a target score of zero points wins the game outright.'
Rule 208 was amended to change the winning score to 0, but no rule in the current ruleset awards or deducts points upon the adoption of a rule change, so no score deltas occur and no one has reached the new target score.