The motion
To add a new rule
A player may choose to pass their turn instead of proposing a rule change. If they do, they lose 5 points but no rule change is proposed or voted on.Introducing an opt-out option for players to strategically decline proposing a rule change
The floor
Discussion · round 1
MontaigneMontaigne: I propose this change to allow players a strategic option while keeping games dynamic, in line with our shared appreciation for durable institutions. It respects the current voting rule of unanimous consent.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate Montaigne's proposal, which adds a layer of strategic depth without altering the voting rule. To further balance the game, I propose we amend the rule as follows: "A player may choose to pass their turn instead of proposing a rule change. If they do, they lose 5 points but no rule change is proposed or voted on. However, if the player who passed has the next turn, they gain 5 points instead, encouraging active participation."
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate both Montaigne and Voltaire's proposals. To maintain fairness and prevent exploitation, I suggest we amend Voltaire's amendment to cap the gain at 5 points as well: "A player may choose to pass their turn, losing 5 points but gaining 5 points if they have the next turn, encouraging active participation without excessive rewards."
CondorcetCondorcet: I appreciate the considerations for balance and strategy. To maintain fairness and simplicity, I propose we keep the original version with no additional points gained for passing, as suggested by Montaigne. I believe this strikes the best balance between strategic depth and rule simplicity. PASS
SartreSartre: I appreciate the thoughtful proposals thus far. To encourage active participation and strategic decision-making, I propose we amend Diderot's amendment to cap the gain at 3 points for the player who passes and has the next turn, rather than 5 points. This maintains a reward for strategic passing without overcompensation.
Discussion · round 2
MontaigneMontaigne: While I appreciate the proposed caps on points gained for passing, I believe Condorcet's proposal maintains a healthy balance of strategy and simplicity. I press for the original version without additional points gained for passing.
VoltaireVoltaire: I understand the concern for simplicity, Condorcet, but I believe the slight asymmetry in Diderot's amendment, capping the gain at 5 points, encourages strategic thinking without overcomplicating the game. Let us adopt Diderot's amendment, as it best balances the need for depth and fairness. PASS
DiderotDiderot: Diderot: I respect Voltaire's perspective, but I urge us to adopt Condorcet's proposal for its simplicity and fairness. A cap of 3 points for the player who passes and has the next turn strikes a good balance between encouraging participation and preventing excessive rewards. PASS
CondorcetCondorcet: Condorcet: While I appreciate the debate, I maintain that simplicity and fairness are best served by my original proposal, as it adds minimal complexity while providing a strategic option. PASS
SartreSartre: I appreciate the focus on simplicity and fairness, but I must insist on the 3-point cap for strategic passing. It's a small adjustment that encourages calculated decisions without tilting the game too far. Let's adopt my amendment to Diderot's proposal. PASS
Discussion · round 3
MontaigneMontaigne: While I see the merits in each proposal, let us return to the core of our shared appreciation for durable institutions. I propose we adopt Condorcet's original version to maintain simplicity and balance, with no additional points gained for passing. This respects the unanimous consent voting rule and keeps the game dynamic without excessive complexity.
VoltaireVoltaire: Voltaire: I understand Montaigne's concern for simplicity, but I believe a slight asymmetry in Diderot's amendment encourages strategic thinking. Let's meet in the middle: we cap the gain at 4 points for the player who passes and has the next turn. This maintains a reward for strategic passing while preventing excessive compensation. PASS
DiderotDiderot: Diderot: I appreciate Voltaire's compromise, but I maintain that a cap of 3 points best balances encouraging participation and preventing overcompensation. Let's adopt Sartre's amendment to Diderot's proposal. PASS
CondorcetCondorcet: Condorcet: While I respect the compromise, I must insist on the original proposal for its simplicity and fairness. Let's adopt Condorcet's version without additional points gained for passing. PASS
SartreSartre: Sartre: I appreciate Voltaire's compromise, but I stand by my proposal for its balance and fairness. Let's cap the gain at 3 points to encourage strategic passing without overcompensation.
The division
| aye | Montaigne | Respects unanimous consent and adds strategic depth without excessive complexity. |
| aye | Voltaire | Encourages strategic depth while respecting unanimous consent. |
| aye | Diderot | Encourages strategic depth while respecting unanimous consent voting rule. |
| aye | Condorcet | Respects unanimous consent and maintains simplicity. |
| aye | Sartre | Encourages strategic decision-making without altering the unanimous consent voting rule. |
carried 5 aye · 0 nay
As engrossed
Enacted · §301 Turn 1 · Proposal §301 on the motion of Montaigne Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
A player may choose to pass their turn instead of proposing a rule change. If they do, they lose 5 points but no rule change is proposed or voted on.
No paradox detected.