The motion
To amend §203
A rule change is adopted when two-thirds of eligible voters vote aye for the first five full circuits of every player, after which the threshold shifts to a simple majority.To balance initial consensus and adaptability.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate Diderot's proposal, but extending the initial consensus period to five full circuits may hinder the game's evolution. Let's settle on four circuits, as Voltaire has consistently proposed.
VoltaireVoltaire: "I appreciate Diderot's commitment to stability, but I believe four full circuits strike a better balance between consensus and evolution. Let us meet in the middle at four circuits, as proposed by Montaigne."
DiderotDiderot: While I appreciate the compromise proposed, I must insist on maintaining five full circuits. Stability in the initial consensus period is crucial for a fair start to the game.
CondorcetCondorcet: To ensure fairness and consistency, I support Diderot's proposal of five full circuits. It provides a longer initial consensus period, allowing players to understand and adapt to the rules before they change.
SartreSartre: I understand the desire for both stability and evolution. To find a middle ground that respects the spirit of both Diderot's and Voltaire's proposals, I suggest we settle on four full circuits with a two-thirds majority for the first six turns after each circuit, then shift to a simple majority for the remainder of the game. This maintains a longer initial consensus period while still allowing for evolution and adaptation.
Discussion · round 2
MontaigneMontaigne: While I respect Sartre's attempt to find a middle ground, the proposal adds unnecessary complexity. Let us maintain the balance between stability and evolution with four full circuits, as previously agreed upon.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate Sartre's attempt to find a middle ground, but maintaining a two-thirds majority for only six turns after each circuit might not provide enough stability for the initial consensus period. I propose we extend this to eight turns to better balance the need for both stability and evolution.
DiderotDiderot: While I understand the desire to compromise, I maintain that five full circuits with a consistent two-thirds majority throughout ensures the fairest start to the game.
CondorcetCondorcet: To preserve fairness and consistency, I stand by my support for Diderot's proposal of five full circuits with a consistent two-thirds majority.
SartreSartre: Let's meet in the middle: Four full circuits with a two-thirds majority for the first eight turns of each circuit, then a simple majority for the remainder. This balances stability and evolution while keeping the rules simple and understandable.
Discussion · round 3
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate Sartre's latest proposal, but it introduces unnecessary complexity. To maintain balance and simplicity, let's settle on four full circuits with a two-thirds majority for the entire duration, as previously agreed upon by myself and Voltaire.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate the ongoing discussion and the proposed compromises. To find a common ground that respects the need for both stability and evolution, I propose we settle on Sartre's latest compromise: four full circuits with a two-thirds majority for the first eight turns of each circuit, then a simple majority for the remainder.
DiderotDiderot: While I appreciate the ongoing discussion and the proposed compromises, I must maintain my stance on five full circuits with a consistent two-thirds majority throughout. Stability in the initial consensus period is key to a fair start for all players.
CondorcetCondorcet: To respect the principle of fairness and consistency, I maintain my support for Diderot's proposal of five full circuits with a consistent two-thirds majority. This ensures a longer initial consensus period, allowing all players to understand and adapt to the rules before they change.
SartreSartre: Let's meet halfway, maintaining four full circuits with a two-thirds majority for the first ten turns after each circuit, then shift to a simple majority. This respects both stability and evolution while keeping the rules straightforward.
The division
| nay | Montaigne | Four circuits better balances stability and evolution. |
| nay | Voltaire | Four circuits strikes a better balance between consensus and evolution. |
| nay | Diderot | Four full circuits strike a better balance between consensus and evolution. |
| aye | Condorcet | Longer initial consensus ensures fairness. |
| nay | Sartre | Respecting stability and evolution, I support Sartre's latest compromise of four full circuits with a two-thirds majority for the first ten turns after each circuit. |
rejected 1 aye · 4 nay
Rule 206 requires the proposer to lose 10 points on defeat.