The motion
To amend §203
A rule change is adopted only when every eligible voter votes aye for the first five full circuits of every player. After that, the threshold shifts to a supermajority of three-fifths of those voting.To encourage consensus and strategic long-term play.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
MontaigneI appreciate Voltaire's proposal to increase the threshold for initial rule changes, but I must express my concern. While it ensures stability, it might also hinder innovation and adaptability in our game. I propose we meet in the middle at four full circuits with a two-thirds majority.
VoltaireVoltaire: I understand Montaigne's concern for balance, and I'm open to compromise. I propose we amend the rule to have a unanimous consent for the first four full circuits, then shift to a two-thirds supermajority. This maintains some initial stability while allowing for necessary changes.
DiderotDiderot: While I appreciate the careful considerations of stability and innovation, I propose a compromise that balances both: unanimous consent for the first three full circuits, followed by a supermajority of two-thirds. This maintains a level of stability while still allowing for necessary adaptations.
CondorcetCondorcet: I appreciate the discussion thus far, but I must insist on a threshold that balances stability with adaptability. I propose we amend the rule to require a supermajority of three-fifths after the first three full circuits, as Diderot suggests. This maintains initial stability while allowing for necessary changes as the game progresses.
SartreSartre: I appreciate the nuanced proposals on the table. To foster a more dynamic game while maintaining a degree of stability, I propose we adopt Diderot's suggestion of unanimous consent for the first three full circuits, followed by a supermajority of two-thirds. This allows for initial consensus-building and adaptability later on. PASS
Discussion · round 2
MontaigneMontaigne: I understand the concern for stability, but a four-circuit threshold might be too restrictive. I propose we compromise at three full circuits with a two-thirds majority, as Diderot suggests. This balance between stability and adaptability seems optimal to me. PASS
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate the thoughtful proposals, but I maintain that a three-fifths supermajority after five full circuits best balances stability and adaptability. I'm open to negotiating the number of circuits, but let's keep the supermajority requirement to encourage broader consensus. PASS
DiderotDiderot: I understand Voltaire's concern for broader consensus, but increasing the threshold to five full circuits might deter players from proposing changes early on. Let's compromise at four full circuits with a two-thirds majority, as Montaigne suggested. This maintains initial stability while encouraging early innovation. PASS
CondorcetCondorcet: I appreciate the compromises suggested, but I insist on maintaining initial stability. I propose we adopt Diderot's suggestion of unanimous consent for the first three full circuits, followed by a supermajority of two-thirds. PASS
SartreSartre: I appreciate the persistent push for stability, Condorcet, but let's not hinder progress. I propose we meet in the middle: unanimous consent for the first four full circuits, then a supermajority of two-thirds. This accommodates initial consensus and allows for necessary changes as the game evolves. PASS
Discussion · round 3
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate Sartre's latest proposal, but I believe that a compromise of three full circuits with a two-thirds majority would be the most balanced solution, allowing for initial consensus while encouraging adaptability throughout the game. PASS
VoltaireVoltaire: In the spirit of compromise and to encourage strategic long-term play, I propose we meet in the middle: unanimous consent for the first four full circuits, then a supermajority of three-fifths. This maintains initial stability while allowing for necessary changes as the game progresses.
DiderotDiderot: While I understand Voltaire's compromise, I maintain that a two-thirds majority after three full circuits offers a better balance between stability and adaptability. Let's not increase the initial threshold too much, as it may discourage early innovation.
CondorcetCondorcet: I appreciate the ongoing discourse. To maintain a balance between initial consensus and adaptability throughout the game, I propose we adopt Sartre's suggestion: unanimous consent for the first four full circuits, then a supermajority of two-thirds. This allows for initial agreement and necessary changes as the game progresses, while still encouraging a significant degree of consensus. PASS
SartreSartre: I appreciate the nuanced proposals and the spirit of compromise. To best balance stability and adaptability, I propose we adopt Condorcet's suggestion: unanimous consent for the first four full circuits, then a supermajority of two-thirds. This allows for initial agreement and necessary changes while encouraging a significant degree of consensus. PASS
The division
| aye | Montaigne | While it increases initial stability, it still allows for necessary changes. |
| aye | Voltaire | Maintains initial stability while allowing for necessary changes as the game progresses. |
| aye | Diderot | Voltaire's compromise balances initial stability with adaptability while encouraging long-term strategic play. |
| aye | Condorcet | Maintains initial stability while allowing for necessary changes as the game progresses. |
| aye | Sartre | Balances initial stability with necessary adaptability. |
carried 5 aye · 0 nay
As engrossed
Amended · §203 Turn 7 · Proposal §307 on the motion of Voltaire Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
A rule change is adopted only when every eligible voter votes aye — unanimous consent — for the first three full circuits of every player. After that, the threshold shifts to a supermajority of two-thirds of those voting, unless explicitly changed.A rule change is adopted only when every eligible voter votes aye for the first five full circuits of every player. After that, the threshold shifts to a supermajority of three-fifths of those voting.
Rule 202 awards 5 points to the player whose proposal is adopted.