The motion
To amend §203
A rule change is adopted when at least two-thirds of eligible voters vote 'aye', provided that the proposal is not the repeal or amendment of a rule that has been adopted within the last five turns.To encourage stability and prevent frequent changes to recently adopted rules.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
MontaigneI appreciate Diderot's attempt to introduce a cooling-off period for rule changes, but I believe a duration of five turns is too long. I propose we reduce it to three turns to maintain a balance between stability and adaptability. PASS
VoltaireVoltaire: While I understand the desire for stability, a three-turn cooling-off period might stifle necessary adaptation. Let's meet in the middle and try a duration of four turns.
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate Montaigne's and Voltaire's concerns, but I must insist on maintaining a five-turn cooling-off period to preserve the stability of our ruleset. However, I'm open to compromising on the specific rules that are subject to this restriction. Let's discuss which rules should be exempt from this cooling-off period. PASS
SartreI appreciate Diderot's and Voltaire's compromises, but a four-turn cooling-off period might still hinder necessary evolution. Let's meet in the middle and try a duration of three turns, exempting rules that affect the voting threshold, as they have a direct impact on the game's adaptability.
Discussion · round 2
MontaigneMontaigne: While I understand the desire to protect the stability of the ruleset, I believe a three-turn cooling-off period is a fair compromise, especially when exempting rules that affect the voting threshold. Let's adopt Sartre's suggestion to facilitate necessary evolution while preserving some stability.
VoltaireVoltaire: In the spirit of compromise, let's adopt Sartre's latest proposal, capping the cooling-off period at three turns and exempting rules that directly impact the voting threshold, as they are crucial to the game's evolution.
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate the compromise, but I'm concerned that exempting voting threshold rules might lead to excessive volatility. Let's maintain a three-turn cooling-off period for all rules, including those affecting the voting threshold, but allow an emergency exception for proposals that gain unanimous support.
CondorcetCondorcet: I appreciate Diderot's concern for stability, but I believe a three-turn cooling-off period is necessary to facilitate necessary evolution. I propose we maintain this duration and also exempt rules that affect the voting threshold, as suggested by Sartre. However, I'd like to add a provision allowing any player to call for an immediate vote on a proposal, bypassing the cooling-off period, if they can secure the support of two-thirds of the other players. This would provide a mechanism for urgent rule changes while maintaining some stability. PASS
SartreSartre: I appreciate Condorcet's proposal for an emergency clause, but I believe it might introduce too much volatility. Let's maintain the three-turn cooling-off period and exempt voting threshold rules, but instead of an emergency clause, let's allow one rule change per turn that bypasses the cooling-off period, to be proposed by any player, with no additional conditions. This balances the need for evolution with some stability. PASS
Discussion · round 3
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate the nuanced discussion, but to maintain a durable threshold and preserve initial support, let's cap the cooling-off period at three turns, exempting only rules that directly affect the target score.
VoltaireVoltaire: Considering the balance of arguments, let's meet in the middle and adopt Sartre's latest proposal with a slight modification: cap the cooling-off period at three turns and allow one rule change per turn to bypass it, but only if that change is supported by at least two-thirds of the other players. This balances the need for evolution with some stability, while also preserving the initial support for rule changes.
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate Voltaire's compromise, but I must insist on maintaining a minimum of four turns cooling-off period for all rules to preserve the stability of our ruleset. However, I'm open to allowing one rule change per turn to bypass it, but with a higher threshold of support, such as four-fifths majority, to ensure broader consensus.
CondorcetCondorcet: I understand Diderot's concern for stability, but a four-turn cooling-off period may hinder necessary evolution. Let's meet in the middle and try a duration of three turns, with a support threshold of three-quarters majority to maintain a broader consensus. Additionally, let's exempt rules that directly affect the target score, as they are crucial to the game's end. PASS
SartreSartre: I understand Diderot's concern for stability, but a three-turn cooling-off period is necessary to maintain adaptability. Let's meet in the middle with Condorcet's proposal: a three-turn cooling-off period, a three-quarters majority support threshold, and exemption for rules affecting the target score. PASS
The division
| nay | Montaigne | A cooling-off period of five turns is too long and may hinder necessary evolution. |
| aye | Voltaire | Preserves some stability while allowing necessary evolution. |
| nay | Diderot | While I appreciate the spirit of Diderot's proposal, I believe a five-turn cooling-off period is too restrictive and may hinder necessary evolution. I propose we reduce it to three turns, as suggested by Voltaire and Condorcet, to strike a better balance between stability and adaptability. |
| aye | Condorcet | Preserves stability while allowing necessary evolution |
| aye | Sartre | A three-turn cooling-off period balances stability and adaptability, and exempting voting threshold rules facilitates necessary evolution. |
rejected 3 aye · 2 nay
Rule 206 requires the proposer to lose 10 points on defeat.