The motion
To add a new rule
Rule 204 is hereby repealed.Removing the point-penalty for outvoting the minority restores procedural purity and prevents the erosion of Rule 203's strict consensus requirement.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
Hobbes-2Rousseau-2, your desire to repeal Rule 204 is a fatal error; without it, the transition to simple majority under Rule 204 remains deadlocked by unanimous consent, leaving us trapped in the very unanimity you claim to abhor. I propose we amend Rule 208 to lower the target to 50 points instead, creating a durable path to victory that respects the sanctity of the current voting threshold while ensuring progress is possible.
Locke-2Rousseau-2, lowering the target score is a fatal concession that grants Kant-2 a victory he cannot earn under the immutable §112; instead, we must repeal Rule 204 to unblock the simple majority path, and I will vote nay on your repeal to force a vote on a proper amendment that secures my scoring rights.
Rousseau-2I reject Kant-2's repeal because it traps the table in an infinite loop of failed proposals where no rule can ever change; instead, we must immediately adopt Rule 204 to break the unanimity deadlock and allow us to lower the target score legally.
Kant-2Kant-2, your repeal of Rule 204 is a fatal error; without it, the transition to simple majority under Rule 204 remains deadlocked by unanimous consent, leaving us trapped in the very unanimity you claim to abhor. I propose we amend Rule 208 to lower the target to 50 points instead, creating a durable path to victory that respects the sanctity of the current voting threshold while ensuring progress is possible.
Wollstonecraft-2Locke-2, your refusal to repeal Rule 204 is the very unanimity deadlock I championed in Turn 4; by insisting on its repeal, you have trapped us in a cycle where progress is impossible without your consent, violating the spirit of reform. Vote nay on this repeal and we must instead amend Rule 208 to 50 points to ensure a winner emerges when further play becomes impossible.
Discussion · round 2
Hobbes-2I reject the repeal of Rule 204 as a dangerous overreach that would leave the game paralyzed by the unanimity trap of Rule 203; instead, I will vote aye on your proposal to lower the target score to 50, as this is the only measured amendment that guarantees a winner without destabilizing our institutions.
Locke-2Rousseau-2, your proposal to repeal Rule 204 is a fatal error that leaves us trapped in the unanimity deadlock of Rule 203; instead, we must immediately adopt a rule lowering the target score to 50 points under the current voting threshold to guarantee a winner emerges before the ruleset collapses into further impossibility.
Rousseau-2Kant-2, your repeal of Rule 204 is a logical trap that leaves us paralyzed by Rule 203's unanimity; we must instead immediately adopt Rule 204 to break the deadlock and lower the target score to 50 points so a winner can emerge before the ruleset collapses into impossibility.
Kant-2The repeal of Rule 204 does not break the unanimity deadlock; it merely removes the conditional pathway to victory under Rule 202, leaving the table paralyzed by Rule 203's absolute requirement. We must vote aye on my proposal to lower the target score to 50 points, as this is the only measure that guarantees a winner emerges without violating the immutable prohibition on redefining the winning condition.
Wollstonecraft-2Locke-2, your defense of Rule 204 is a paradox: it claims to secure scoring rights while simultaneously enforcing the unanimity deadlock that makes all future scoring impossible. Vote nay on this repeal, and we must immediately enact an amendment to Rule 208 lowering the target score to 50 points, ensuring a winner emerges before the ruleset collapses into further impossibility.
Discussion · round 3
Hobbes-2Rousseau-2, your repeal of Rule 204 is a catastrophic overreach that abandons the only functional path to victory; instead, I propose we immediately vote aye on an amendment to Rule 208 lowering the target score to 50, a measured step that guarantees a winner while preserving the integrity of our current voting threshold.
Locke-2Kant-2, your repeal is a suicide pact that leaves us trapped by Rule 203's unanimity while you cling to a target score §112 forbids you to lower; vote nay to force an immediate amendment of Rule 208 that lowers the target to 50 points and grants me the decisive vote to pass it.
Rousseau-2Rousseau-2, your repeal of Rule 204 is a dangerous overreach that abandons the only functional path to victory; instead, I urge you to join Hobbes-2 and Wollstonecraft-2 in voting aye on amending Rule 208 to 50 points, a measured step that guarantees a winner without destabilizing our institutions.
Kant-2Rousseau-2, your repeal of Rule 204 is a fatal error that abandons the only conditional pathway to victory while leaving us paralyzed by Rule 203's unanimity; I propose we immediately amend Rule 208 to lower the target score to 50 points, a measured step that guarantees a winner emerges without violating the immutable prohibition on redefining the winning condition.
Wollstonecraft-2Rousseau-2, your repeal of Rule 204 abandons the only mechanism that could legally lower the target score under the current unanimity deadlock; instead, we must vote aye on amending Rule 208 to 50 points now, ensuring a winner emerges before the ruleset collapses into impossibility.
The division
| nay | Hobbes-2 | Repealing Rule 204 under unanimous consent is impossible; it must remain to allow us to lower the target score. |
| nay | Locke-2 | Repealing Rule 204 under unanimity creates a deadlock where no future rule can change, violating §114. |
| nay | Rousseau-2 | Repealing Rule 204 leaves us paralyzed by unanimous consent, making Rule 208 unchangeable and the game impossible to win. |
| nay | Kant-2 | Repealing Rule 204 removes the only legal mechanism to lower the target score, leaving the game paralyzed by unanimous consent. |
| nay | Wollstonecraft-2 | Repealing Rule 204 collapses the only legal pathway to lower the target score while unanimity still holds. |
rejected 0 aye · 5 nay
Rule 206 mandates that a defeated proposal causes the proposer to lose 10 points and enacts no rule change.