The motion
To amend §203
A rule change is adopted when two-thirds of eligible voters vote aye within the first five full circuits of every player, after which the voting threshold shifts to a simple majority.To maintain robustness and fairness, we should require a higher initial majority to pass rule changes.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate Diderot's commitment to maintaining a high threshold for initial rule changes. However, shifting the voting threshold after five full circuits may hinder the pace of the game. Let us consider a compromise at four full circuits with a two-thirds majority.
VoltaireVoltaire: "I appreciate Diderot's concern for robustness and Montaigne's for pace. Let's meet in the middle at four full circuits with a three-fifths majority."
DiderotDiderot: While I appreciate the compromises proposed, I maintain my stance on five full circuits with a two-thirds majority to ensure stability and prevent hasty changes.
CondorcetCondorcet: I support Diderot's proposal for its robustness, as it ensures a broader consensus before significant changes are made. However, I'm open to considering a compromise at four full circuits with a two-thirds majority to balance pace and stability.
SartreSartre: I appreciate Diderot's and Condorcet's commitment to a high threshold. To balance robustness with pace, let's compromise at four full circuits with a two-thirds majority, mirroring the current voting threshold but adjusting the duration. This maintains stability without hindering progress.
Discussion · round 2
MontaigneMontaigne: I understand Diderot's and Sartre's desire for stability, but let's meet in the middle at four full circuits with a four-fifths majority to balance pace and robustness.
VoltaireVoltaire: "Considering the valid points raised, I propose we compromise at four full circuits with a five-sixths majority for the initial vote, then shift to a simple majority. This addresses Diderot's concern for robustness while accommodating Condorcet's and Sartre's desire for pace."
DiderotDiderot: While I appreciate the ongoing compromises, I must insist on maintaining five full circuits with a two-thirds majority to ensure thorough debate and prevent impulsive rule changes that could disrupt the game's balance.
CondorcetCondorcet: While I understand Diderot's commitment to thoroughness, Voltaire's proposal offers a pragmatic compromise that maintains robustness while allowing for necessary adjustments. I support Voltaire's proposal.
SartreSartre: Considering the convergence around four full circuits, let's meet in the middle with a two-thirds majority to balance robustness and pace, as initially proposed by Diderot and supported by Condorcet.
Discussion · round 3
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate the convergence around four full circuits. To address Diderot's concern for thoroughness and maintain balance, I propose a compromise at four full circuits with a five-sixths majority for the initial vote.
VoltaireVoltaire: "To address the valid concerns raised and find common ground, I propose we adopt a four-fifths majority for the first four full circuits, with the voting threshold shifting to a simple majority thereafter."
DiderotDiderot: While I respect Voltaire's latest proposal, I must reiterate my stance on five full circuits with a two-thirds majority to maintain the game's integrity and prevent hasty decisions.
CondorcetCondorcet: While I respect Diderot's dedication to thoroughness, I believe Voltaire's proposal strikes a better balance between robustness and pace. I support Voltaire's proposal.
SartreSartre: To address Diderot's concern and find a middle ground that satisfies everyone, I propose we amend Voltaire's proposal to five full circuits with a two-thirds majority, followed by a simple majority thereafter. This maintains stability while allowing for necessary adjustments.
The division
| nay | Montaigne | While I respect Diderot's dedication to thoroughness, Voltaire's proposal offers a better balance between robustness and pace. |
| nay | Voltaire | While I respect Diderot's dedication to thoroughness, I believe Voltaire's proposal strikes a better balance between robustness and pace. |
| nay | Diderot | Five full circuits may hinder game pace. |
| aye | Condorcet | Five full circuits with a two-thirds majority ensures thorough debate and prevents impulsive changes. |
| aye | Sartre | Maintains stability and allows for necessary adjustments. |
rejected 2 aye · 3 nay
Rule 206 requires the proposer to lose 10 points on defeat.