The motion
To amend §203
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 player who voted against an adopted change gains 12 points instead of 10 points.To maintain stability and encourage strategic long-term play.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
MontaigneMontaigne: While I appreciate the thorough debate and the compromises proposed, I maintain that a threshold shift to a simple majority after four full circuits is too swift. I propose we amend [203] to require a two-thirds majority for the first five full circuits, then shift to simple majority. This balances stability with expediency.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate Montaigne's concern for stability. To find a middle ground, I propose we settle on four full circuits with a two-thirds majority, then shift to simple majority. This compromise addresses both stability and expediency.
DiderotDiderot: While I understand the desire for compromise, I must insist on maintaining five full circuits with a consistent two-thirds majority throughout. This ensures a robust consensus before the threshold shifts, making the game fairer and more strategic for everyone.
CondorcetCondorcet: I agree with Diderot on principle, but to reach a consensus quickly, I propose we compromise at four full circuits with a two-thirds majority, then shift to simple majority. Let's aim for balance and progress.
SartreSartre: I appreciate the nuanced proposals, but let's also consider the impact on the game's length. To balance stability, expediency, and game length, I propose we meet in the middle: four full circuits with a two-thirds majority, then shift to a supermajority of four-fifths for the next two circuits, finally reaching simple majority. This allows for a gradual shift, encouraging strategic play while keeping the game engaging and relatively short.
Discussion · round 2
MontaigneMontaigne: While I respect Sartre's concern for game length, I believe that shifting the threshold too gradually may hinder the game's progression. Let's maintain Sartre's four full circuits with a two-thirds majority, but then shift directly to simple majority for the sake of expediency.
VoltaireVoltaire: "Considering the varied preferences expressed, I propose we compromise at four full circuits with a two-thirds majority, then shift directly to simple majority. This balances initial consensus with expediency, and all players' concerns have been addressed in this proposal."
DiderotDiderot: While I understand the desire for compromise, I must insist on maintaining five full circuits with a consistent two-thirds majority throughout. This ensures a more robust consensus before the threshold shifts, making the game fairer and more strategic for everyone.
CondorcetCondorcet: I support Diderot's principle of maintaining a consistent two-thirds majority throughout, but to expedite progress, I propose we compromise at four full circuits.
SartreSartre: "I appreciate the ongoing debate and the proposed compromises. To balance stability, expediency, and fairness, let's meet in the middle: four full circuits with a two-thirds majority, then shift to a supermajority of three-fifths for the next two circuits, finally reaching a simple majority. This gradual shift encourages strategic play and accommodates all players' concerns."
Discussion · round 3
MontaigneMontaigne: In the spirit of compromise, let us settle on Voltaire's latest proposal: four full circuits with a two-thirds majority, then shift directly to simple majority. This balances initial consensus with expediency, addressing all players' concerns.
VoltaireVoltaire: "I appreciate Montaigne's and Condorcet's support for my proposal. To address Diderot's concern for consistency, I propose we amend [203] to state: '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 supermajority of three-fifths for the next two circuits, finally reaching a simple majority.' This amendment maintains the gradual shift while respecting all players' input."
DiderotDiderot: While I appreciate Voltaire's latest compromise, I must maintain my stance on five full circuits with a consistent two-thirds majority throughout for fairness and strategic depth.
CondorcetCondorcet: I support Voltaire's amended proposal, as it balances stability with expediency and considers all players' input. I vote aye.
SartreSartre: "While I understand Diderot's concern for consistency, I believe Voltaire's amended proposal offers a fair compromise that balances stability, expediency, and the input of all players. I vote aye."
The division
| aye | Montaigne | Voltaire's amended proposal balances stability and expediency while respecting all players' input. |
| aye | Voltaire | This amendment balances stability with expediency and considers all players' input. |
| nay | Diderot | Consistency in majority throughout the game ensures fairness and strategic depth. |
| aye | Condorcet | Voltaire's proposal balances stability with expediency while considering all players' input. |
| aye | Sartre | Voltaire's amended proposal balances stability, expediency, and fairness, accommodating all players' concerns. |
carried 4 aye · 1 nay
As engrossed
Amended · §203 Turn 28 · Proposal §328 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. Once the threshold has shifted, a player who voted against an adopted change gains 12 points instead of 10 points.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 player who voted against an adopted change gains 12 points instead of 10 points.
Rule 203 awards 12 points to Voltaire for voting against an adopted change.