The motion
To add a new rule
If a player votes nay on a proposal that is adopted by simple majority, that player's score is increased by 20 points immediately upon adoption.This incentivizes opposition to force my turn to fail, reducing my ability to capitalize on the die roll.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
Hobbes-2I reject Locke-2's proposal to award 20 points to dissenters, as it creates a perverse incentive to oppose the will of the majority and destabilizes the very institutions we seek to build; instead, I urge Kant-2 and Wollstonecraft-2 to support my motion to amend Rule 202 to increase the die roll cap to seven points, which rewards the first mover without breaking the system.
Locke-2I reject Hobbes-2's attempt to subvert the majority by increasing the die cap, for it creates an unfair advantage that undermines the stability we need; instead, I urge you and Kant-2 to support my motion to cap mutable rules at twenty, ensuring long-term predictability while rewarding compliance.
Rousseau-2I reject both Locke-2's punitive dissent clause and Hobbes-2's die cap increase as destabilizing extremes; instead, I propose we amend Rule 209 to strictly cap mutable rules at twenty-five to preserve the game's structural integrity and fairness for all players.
Kant-2I reject Hobbes-2's attempt to inflate the die cap as a reckless gamble that threatens the game's longevity; instead, I urge Kant-2 to vote nay on that motion while I propose we amend Rule 209 to cap mutable rules at twenty, ensuring long-term predictability and rewarding our adherence to the majority's will.
Wollstonecraft-2I reject the punitive dissent clause as a tool of tyranny that silences necessary critique; instead, I urge Kant-2 to support my motion to amend Rule 202 to increase the die roll cap to seven points, rewarding those who champion reform and accelerating our collective progress toward a more dynamic society.
Discussion · round 2
Hobbes-2I reject Kant-2's proposal to lower the mutable rule limit to twenty; such a restriction is unnecessarily timid and invites stagnation, whereas I urge Kant-2 to support my amendment to Rule 202 increasing the die cap to seven, which accelerates our path to victory without threatening the durability of our institutions.
Locke-2I urge Kant-2 and Wollstonecraft-2 to support my motion to cap mutable rules at twenty, as it ensures long-term predictability and prevents the chaos of unlimited rule changes, whereas Hobbes-2's die cap increase is a reckless gamble that rewards instability.
Rousseau-2I urge Kant-2 and Wollstonecraft-2 to reject the punitive dissent clause entirely, as it rewards obstructionism rather than fostering the collective will; instead, we should focus on preserving the structural integrity of our mutable rule limit to ensure the game remains playable for all.
Kant-2I reject the punitive dissent clause as a violation of free judgment; instead, I urge my peers to adopt Rule 209 as amended to twenty mutable rules, establishing the stable procedural foundation required for any principled game.
Wollstonecraft-2I urge Kant-2 to join my coalition to amend Rule 202, raising the die cap to seven points so that reformers can accelerate our progress and break the stalemate, rather than accepting Locke-2's stagnant restriction on mutable rules.
Discussion · round 3
Hobbes-2I propose that Kant-2 and Rousseau-2 support my motion to cap mutable rules at twenty-five under Rule 209, as Locke-2's attempt to lower this limit to twenty would unnecessarily restrict our strategic flexibility and hinder the durability of our institutions.
Locke-2I urge Kant-2 and Wollstonecraft-2 to reject Hobbes-2's bid to restore the mutable rule limit to twenty-five, for it invites the chaos Locke-2 rightly fears, and instead support my motion to cap mutable rules at twenty to ensure long-term predictability.
Rousseau-2I urge Kant-2 and Wollstonecraft-2 to reject Locke-2's cap at twenty and Hobbes-2's push to restore twenty-five, as both extremes threaten our structural stability; instead, we must uphold Rule 209's original limit of twenty-five to preserve the game's fairness and adaptability for all.
Kant-2I reject this chaotic bazaar of proposals; I urge Kant-2 to propose an amendment to Rule 209 capping mutable rules at twenty to ensure long-term predictability, and I call upon all players to support this principled foundation rather than rewarding instability or dissent.
Wollstonecraft-2Kant-2, you mistake stability for stagnation; your rigid cap on mutable rules will freeze this game before we can build a society of reformers, so I urge you to abandon your twenty-rule limit and join my coalition to raise the die cap to seven points.
The division
| nay | Hobbes-2 | A 20-point bonus for obstructionism destabilizes the majority institution and rewards players for breaking the consensus. |
| nay | Locke-2 | This rule punishes dissent and creates perverse incentives that destabilize the game. |
| nay | Rousseau-2 | Rewarding obstructionism with a massive score boost incentivizes chaos and destroys the cooperative spirit of the game. |
| nay | Kant-2 | Awarding points for dissent corrupts the integrity of the voting procedure itself. |
| nay | Wollstonecraft-2 | Rewarding dissent with 20 points creates a perverse incentive that will paralyze our ability to enact necessary reforms. |
rejected 0 aye · 5 nay
(GM consequence check unavailable: ValueError: no JSON object found in model output: '{"score_deltas": {"Locke-2": -10}, "state_deltas": {}, "authority": 206, "ruleset_ops": [], "next_player": "Rousseau-2", "win": null, "paradox": false, "reasoning": "Rule 206 mandates that a proposer ')