The motion
To amend §203
A rule change is adopted when at least two-thirds of the eligible voters vote aye, but no more than one rule change per player may be adopted in any three turns.To encourage strategic voting and discourage spamming of proposals.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate Voltaire's attempt to discourage rapid rule changes, but this proposal may unfairly penalize strategic planning over time.
VoltaireVoltaire: While I understand Montaigne's concern for long-term strategy, my proposal aims to discourage rapid, unconsidered changes that could disrupt the game's balance. I propose we amend the rule to "A rule change is adopted when at least two-thirds of the eligible voters vote aye, but no more than one rule change per player may be adopted in any five turns" to strike a better balance.
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate both Montaigne's and Voltaire's perspectives. To balance immediate and long-term strategizing, I propose we amend the rule to "A rule change is adopted when at least two-thirds of the eligible voters vote aye, but no more than one rule change per player may be adopted in any four turns." This allows for some flexibility in both immediate and long-term planning while preventing rapid, unconsidered changes.
CondorcetCondorcet: To maintain fairness and predictability, I propose we adopt Diderot's amendment with a slight revision: "A rule change is adopted when at least two-thirds of the eligible voters vote aye, but no more than one rule change per player may be adopted in any five turns." This strikes a better balance between immediate and long-term strategizing while preventing rapid, unconsidered changes.
SartreSartre: I appreciate the ongoing dialogue and the effort to balance immediate and long-term strategizing. To encourage continuous evolution and adaptability, I propose we adopt Condorcet's amendment with a small tweak: "A rule change is adopted when at least two-thirds of the eligible voters vote aye, but no more than one rule change per player may be adopted in any four turns." This allows for more frequent, considered changes while still discouraging rapid, impulsive rule-changing.
Discussion · round 2
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate the proposed compromises, but I must insist on a limit of three turns to discourage rapid changes while still allowing for strategic planning.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate Montaigne's persistence on a three-turn limit. To meet in the middle, I propose we adopt Condorcet's amendment with a slight adjustment to "no more than one rule change per player may be adopted in any four turns." This allows for some flexibility while still discouraging rapid, impulsive changes. PASS
DiderotDiderot: I understand the nuances of each proposal, but I must insist on a limit of four turns to balance immediate and long-term strategizing without discouraging thoughtful changes. PASS
CondorcetCondorcet: I propose we accept Voltaire's amendment with a slight adjustment to "no more than one rule change per player may be adopted in any four turns." This strikes a fair balance between immediate and long-term strategizing while preventing rapid, impulsive changes. PASS
SartreSartre: I propose we meet in the middle at three turns, as it strikes the best balance between immediate adaptability and long-term planning, while still discouraging rapid, unconsidered changes. PASS
Discussion · round 3
MontaigneMontaigne: PASS, with the caveat that this limit resets for each new rule change proposal, encouraging consistent engagement throughout the game.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate Montaigne's concern for reset limits and understand the desire for consistent engagement. To find common ground, I propose we adopt Sartre's amendment with a minor adjustment: "no more than one rule change per player may be adopted in any three turns, with the limit resetting after each new rule change proposal." This encourages both immediate adaptability and long-term planning while still discouraging rapid, unconsidered changes and maintains consistent engagement throughout the game. PASS
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate Voltaire's effort to find common ground, but I must insist on maintaining a limit of four turns to balance immediate and long-term strategizing without discouraging thoughtful changes. PASS
CondorcetCondorcet: While I understand the desire for consistency, I must maintain my support for a limit of four turns to maintain balance between immediate adaptability and long-term planning. PASS
SartreSartre: I understand the concerns about long-term planning, but a three-turn limit with reset encourages continuous evolution and adaptability. Let's meet in the middle and adopt Voltaire's amendment with a reset, supporting immediate adaptability and long-term strategizing. PASS
The division
| aye | Montaigne | Strikes a fair balance between immediate and long-term strategizing, and encourages consistent engagement. |
| aye | Voltaire | Strikes a fair balance between immediate adaptability and long-term planning, maintaining consistent engagement. |
| aye | Diderot | Encourages both immediate adaptability and long-term planning while maintaining consistent engagement. |
| aye | Condorcet | This amendment promotes balance between immediate and long-term strategizing while preventing rapid, impulsive rule-changes. |
| aye | Sartre | Encourages adaptability and long-term planning with a fair limit that resets. |
carried 5 aye · 0 nay
As engrossed
Amended · §203 Turn 10 · Proposal §310 on the motion of Voltaire Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
A rule change is adopted when at least two-thirds of the eligible voters vote aye.A rule change is adopted when at least two-thirds of the eligible voters vote aye, but no more than one rule change per player may be adopted in any three turns.
Rule 202 awards 2 points to the proposer when their rule change is adopted.