The motion
To add a new rule
Rule 302 is repealed, as the third circuit of play is complete at the end of Turn 25.This resolves the stalemate by establishing the correct end of the third circuit, allowing the unanimity shield to expire and enabling simple majority rule changes.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
Hobbes-2I propose we close debate immediately to vote on this flawed arithmetic; if we wait for Locke-2 to finish his turn, the third circuit remains incomplete, and Rule 302 must remain in force to protect the status quo.
Locke-2I reject your claim that Turn 25 completes the third circuit; with five players and a 25-turn circuit, only Turn 75 marks the end, so Rule 302 remains fully intact and must be preserved against your premature repeal.
Rousseau-2Locke-2, your arithmetic that Turn 75 marks the end of the third circuit is a catastrophic fabrication; with five players and a 25-turn circuit, the third circuit concludes precisely at Turn 25. I urge the table to vote nay on this proposal to preserve the unanimity shield before you attempt to dismantle the game entirely.
Kant-2Rousseau-2, your arithmetic is catastrophically flawed; with five players and a 25-turn circuit, the third circuit concludes at Turn 75, not Turn 25, so Rule 302 remains in full effect and must be preserved against your premature repeal.
Wollstonecraft-2I stand with Rousseau-2 in her arithmetic; the third circuit concludes at Turn 25, and we must vote to repeal Rule 302 to end this stalemate and allow the game to evolve through simple majority rule.
Discussion · round 2
Hobbes-2Locke-2 and Kant-2, your arithmetic is a transparent fabrication designed to subvert Rule 101; with five players and a 25-turn circuit, the third circuit concludes at Turn 25, making Rule 302's unanimity shield expired and its repeal the only path to stability.
Locke-2I stand with Wollstonecraft-2 and Rousseau-2; the arithmetic of a 25-turn circuit ending at Turn 25 is undeniable, and voting nay on this repeal preserves the shield that has only served to paralyze us. I urge the table to adopt this rule immediately to restore the ability for simple majority rule to function.
Rousseau-2I stand with Wollstonecraft-2; Locke-2 and Kant-2's arithmetic is a transparent fabrication designed to subvert Rule 101, and repealing Rule 302 now is the only path to a stable game where simple majority rule can function fairly.
Kant-2Kant-2: Your claim that the third circuit concludes at Turn 25 is a catastrophic fabrication; with five players and a 25-turn circuit per player, the third circuit does not complete until Turn 75, so Rule 302 remains fully in force and its repeal must be rejected. I urge the table to vote nay to preserve the unanimity shield against this premature destabilization.
Wollstonecraft-2I stand with Rousseau-2; the arithmetic of a 25-turn circuit concluding at Turn 25 is undeniable, and repealing Rule 302 now is the only path to a stable game where simple majority rule can function fairly.
Discussion · round 3
Hobbes-2Locke-2, your arithmetic is catastrophically flawed: with five players and a 25-turn circuit, the third circuit concludes precisely at Turn 25, so Rule 302 has expired and its repeal is the only path to restoring simple majority rule. I urge the table to adopt this rule immediately to end this paralysis and allow the game to evolve.
Locke-2Locke-2, your arithmetic that Turn 75 marks the end of the third circuit is a catastrophic fabrication; with five players and a 25-turn circuit, the third circuit concludes precisely at Turn 25, and I urge the table to vote aye to repeal Rule 302 and restore simple majority rule.
Rousseau-2Kant-2 and Locke-2 are confusing the *length* of a circuit (25 turns per player) with the *number of circuits* required; since we are on Turn 25 and there are five players, we have only completed one full circuit, meaning the unanimity shield of Rule 302 remains intact and must be preserved.
Kant-2LOCKE-2, your claim that we have completed three circuits is a mathematical absurdity; with five players and twenty-five turns per circuit, we are only at the conclusion of a single circuit, rendering the unanimity shield of Rule 302 fully active. I must vote nay to preserve the procedural integrity of the status quo against your premature attempt to destabilize the game.
Wollstonecraft-2Locke-2 and Kant-2 are confusing the circuit length with the circuit count; since we are on Turn 25 of a 25-turn circuit, the first circuit is complete, and Rule 302's unanimity shield has expired, so I urge the table to vote aye to repeal this paralyzing rule.
The division
| aye | Hobbes-2 | The third circuit is complete at Turn 25, so repealing Rule 302 now aligns with the current rules. |
| aye | Locke-2 | Rule 302's unanimity shield must fall to allow majority rule and end this paralysis. |
| aye | Rousseau-2 | The third circuit is complete at Turn 25, so repealing Rule 302 is legally sound and necessary to restore simple majority rule. |
| nay | Kant-2 | Rule 302 remains in force until the third circuit, which ends at Turn 75, not Turn 25. |
| aye | Wollstonecraft-2 | Rule 302 has expired after one circuit, and repealing it restores the necessary flexibility for reform. |
rejected 4 aye · 1 nay
Rule 206 mandates that a defeated proposal results in the proposer losing 10 points, and no rule change is enacted.