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 encourage initial consensus and adaptability later on.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate Voltaire's proposal, but extending the initial consensus period to five full circuits may hinder swift decision-making. Let us meet in the middle at four full circuits, maintaining the two-thirds majority for the initial phase.
VoltaireVoltaire: I understand Montaigne's concern for swift decision-making. To address this while still encouraging broader consensus, I propose a compromise: three full circuits with a two-thirds majority, followed by a simple majority thereafter.
DiderotDiderot: While I appreciate the compromise proposed by Voltaire, I maintain that five full circuits with a consistent two-thirds majority throughout ensures the stability and longevity of our ruleset.
CondorcetCondorcet: I support Diderot's stance on maintaining five full circuits with a consistent two-thirds majority. Stability and longevity are crucial in our game, and this ensures that significant changes require broad consensus.
SartreSartre: I appreciate the ongoing discussion and the proposed compromises. To find a middle ground that balances initial consensus and swift decision-making, I propose we settle on four full circuits with a two-thirds majority, followed by a simple majority thereafter. This amendment maintains some stability while still allowing for efficient rule changes.
Discussion · round 2
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate the thoughtful proposals and ongoing negotiation. To find a common ground that balances initial consensus and efficient decision-making, I propose we settle on three full circuits with a two-thirds majority, followed by a simple majority thereafter. This amendment takes into account the concerns of swiftness and stability.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate the ongoing discussion and the proposed compromises. To find a common ground that balances initial consensus and efficient decision-making, I propose we settle on four full circuits with a two-thirds majority, followed by a simple majority thereafter. This amendment takes into account the concerns of all players while still encouraging strategic play.
DiderotDiderot: Diderot: I understand the desire for compromise, but I must insist on maintaining five full circuits with a consistent two-thirds majority. This ensures that our ruleset remains robust and resistant to impulsive changes.
CondorcetCondorcet: I maintain my support for Diderot's proposal. Stability and longevity are paramount, and five full circuits with a consistent two-thirds majority ensures that significant changes are thoroughly considered.
SartreSartre: "I propose we meet in the middle: four full circuits with a two-thirds majority, followed by a simple majority. This amendment respects the need for initial consensus while allowing for efficient rule changes."
Discussion · round 3
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate Sartre's latest proposal, but it introduces unnecessary complexity. To maintain a balance between consensus and efficiency, I propose we settle on Voltaire's latest proposal: four full circuits with a two-thirds majority, followed by a simple majority thereafter. This amendment respects the need for initial consensus while allowing for efficient rule changes, and it has the added benefit of being a compromise that takes into account the concerns of all players.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate Montaigne's latest proposal. To address the concerns of all players, I propose a slight adjustment: four full circuits with a two-thirds majority, followed by a three-fifths majority thereafter. This amendment maintains initial consensus while allowing for efficient rule changes, and it is a compromise that respects the input of all players.
DiderotDiderot: While I understand the desire for compromise, I must insist on maintaining five full circuits with a consistent two-thirds majority. This ensures that our ruleset remains robust and resistant to impulsive changes.
CondorcetCondorcet: I remain steadfast in supporting Diderot's proposal of five full circuits with a consistent two-thirds majority, as it ensures the longevity and stability of our ruleset.
SartreSartre: "In the spirit of compromise, I propose we settle on Voltaire's latest proposal: four full circuits with a two-thirds majority, followed by a three-fifths majority thereafter. This amendment balances initial consensus and efficiency, addressing the concerns of all players."
The division
| aye | Montaigne | Voltaire's proposal balances initial consensus and efficiency, respecting the input of all players. |
| aye | Voltaire | This amendment balances initial consensus and efficiency, addressing the concerns of all players. |
| nay | Diderot | Maintaining five full circuits with a consistent two-thirds majority ensures the longevity and stability of our ruleset. |
| aye | Condorcet | Stability and longevity are crucial, and five full circuits ensure thorough consideration of significant changes. |
| aye | Sartre | Balances initial consensus and efficiency, respecting all players' input. |
carried 4 aye · 1 nay
As engrossed
Amended · §203 Turn 18 · Proposal §318 on the motion of Voltaire Carried 4 aye · 1 nay
A rule change is adopted when two-thirds of eligible voters vote aye for the first four full circuits of every player, after which the threshold shifts to a simple majority.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.
Rule 202 awards 5 points to the player whose proposal is adopted.