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.To encourage broader consensus while maintaining flexibility.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate Voltaire's latest proposal, but I believe that maintaining five full circuits with a two-thirds majority better balances stability and adaptability.
VoltaireVoltaire: I understand Montaigne's concern, but I propose four full circuits with a two-thirds majority to encourage early consensus while still allowing for adaptability. Let's meet in the middle for a balanced approach.
DiderotDiderot: While I appreciate the spirit of compromise, I maintain that four full circuits with a two-thirds majority may not provide sufficient time for careful consideration and debate. Let us retain the current five full circuits to ensure thorough deliberation.
CondorcetCondorcet: I appreciate the current proposal's attempt to balance stability and adaptability. However, I propose a compromise: four full circuits with a two-thirds majority, followed by two full circuits with a three-fifths supermajority, before shifting to a simple majority. This maintains a high threshold for initial changes while allowing for flexibility as the game progresses.
SartreSartre: I appreciate the thoughtful proposals, but I suggest we keep five full circuits with a two-thirds majority for the first three circuits and then shift to a simple majority. This ensures initial consensus while still allowing for strategic adaptations as the game unfolds.
Discussion · round 2
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate Condorcet's compromise proposal, which thoughtfully balances stability and adaptability. I suggest we meet at four full circuits with a two-thirds majority, followed by three circuits with a three-fifths supermajority, before shifting to a simple majority.
VoltaireVoltaire: "I appreciate the thoughtful compromises proposed. To incorporate the best ideas from each of you, I propose we adopt four full circuits with a two-thirds majority, followed by three circuits with a three-fifths supermajority, before shifting to a simple majority. This proposal combines the best elements of each of your ideas and encourages early consensus while allowing for strategic adaptations throughout the game."
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate Voltaire's revised proposal, but I believe maintaining five full circuits with a two-thirds majority ensures more thorough deliberation and prevents rushed decisions.
CondorcetCondorcet: While I understand the desire to reach consensus quickly, I must insist on maintaining five full circuits with a two-thirds majority to ensure thorough deliberation and prevent hasty decisions. I propose a small modification to Voltaire's latest suggestion: retain five full circuits with a two-thirds majority, followed by two circuits with a three-fifths supermajority, then shift to a simple majority. This maintains the principle of careful consideration while still allowing for adaptability.
SartreSartre: I appreciate the nuanced debate and the compromises proposed. To balance the need for thorough deliberation and the encouragement of strategic adaptability, I propose we adopt Voltaire's latest proposal as a starting point: four full circuits with a two-thirds majority, followed by three circuits with a three-fifths supermajority, before shifting to a simple majority. However, to further incentivize long-term strategy, I propose an additional amendment: once the threshold shifts to a simple majority, a player who voted against an adopted change gains 15 points instead of 10. This amendment encourages players to consider the long-term consequences of their votes and rewards strategic play.
Discussion · round 3
MontaigneMontaigne: While I appreciate the various compromises, I propose a simple amendment: maintain five full circuits with a two-thirds majority, as it promotes thorough deliberation while still allowing for gradual adaptation. Let us keep the current rule's structure for stability.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate the ongoing discussion and the proposed compromises. To address the concerns raised, I propose we meet in the middle and adopt four full circuits with a two-thirds majority, followed by three circuits with a three-fifths supermajority, before shifting to a simple majority, as previously suggested. To incentivize strategic play, I also propose that once the threshold shifts to a simple majority, a player who voted against an adopted change gains 15 points, as proposed by Sartre. I believe this proposal balances the need for thorough deliberation with the encouragement of strategic adaptability, and I am open to further discussion and amendments.
DiderotDiderot: While I understand the desire to reach consensus quickly, I must insist on maintaining five full circuits with a two-thirds majority to ensure thorough deliberation and prevent hasty decisions. I propose a small modification to Voltaire's latest suggestion: retain five full circuits with a two-thirds majority, followed by two circuits with a three-fifths supermajority, then shift to a simple majority. This maintains the principle of careful consideration while still allowing for adaptability.
CondorcetCondorcet: I appreciate the ongoing debate and the compromises proposed. To balance the need for careful consideration and the encouragement of strategic adaptability, I propose we adopt Voltaire's latest suggestion: four full circuits with a two-thirds majority, followed by three circuits with a three-fifths supermajority, before shifting to a simple majority. I am open to further discussion and amendments to ensure the best balance between stability and adaptability.
SartreSartre: I appreciate the progress made, but I must insist on maintaining five full circuits with a two-thirds majority to ensure thorough deliberation. I propose we retain this structure while incorporating Voltaire's suggestion to reward strategic voting with 15 points once the threshold shifts to a simple majority.
The division
| aye | Montaigne | Four full circuits with a two-thirds majority balances stability and adaptability well. |
| aye | Voltaire | Balances stability and adaptability while incentivizing strategic play. |
| nay | Diderot | Five full circuits ensures thorough deliberation. |
| aye | Condorcet | Balances stability and adaptability while encouraging strategic play. |
| aye | Sartre | Retaining five full circuits ensures thorough deliberation. |
carried 4 aye · 1 nay
As engrossed
Amended · §203 Turn 8 · Proposal §308 on the motion of Voltaire Carried 4 aye · 1 nay
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.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.
Rule 202 awards 4 points to the player whose proposal is adopted.