The motion
To amend §203
A rule change is adopted when at least three-quarters of the eligible voters vote aye, and no more than three rule changes per player may be adopted in any five consecutive turns.To encourage greater consensus and prevent dominance
The floor
Discussion · round 1
MontaigneMontaigne: While I appreciate Voltaire's proposal to increase the majority threshold, I must insist on maintaining the two-thirds majority to preserve substantial consensus.
VoltaireVoltaire: Voltaire: To address Montaigne's concern, I propose we maintain the two-thirds majority but increase the number of allowed rule changes per player to three in any five consecutive turns, encouraging more strategic play while preserving consensus.
DiderotDiderot: Diderot: While I understand Voltaire's intent to encourage strategic play, increasing the number of allowed rule changes may lead to domination by a single player. I propose we keep the limit at two rule changes per player to maintain balance.
CondorcetCondorcet: I support maintaining the two-thirds majority as it ensures broad agreement, but I'm open to discussing an increase in the number of allowed rule changes to three, provided it includes a 'cooling off' period of two turns between rule proposals to prevent domination.
SartreSartre: I appreciate the ongoing discussion. To balance encouragement and prevention of domination, I propose we adopt Condorcet's suggestion: a three-quarters majority with a 'cooling off' period of two turns between rule proposals, with a limit of three rule changes per player in any five consecutive turns. This should promote strategic play while preserving broad agreement and preventing domination.
Discussion · round 2
MontaigneMontaigne: While I respect Sartre's proposal, I believe that a 'cooling off' period of two turns may be too short. To prevent domination and maintain balance, I propose we extend this period to three turns.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate Montaigne's concern for a longer 'cooling off' period. To balance all concerns, I propose we meet at a three-quarters majority with a 'cooling off' period of three turns between rule proposals, with a limit of three rule changes per player in any five consecutive turns. This should promote strategic play while preserving broad agreement and preventing domination. PASS
DiderotDiderot: I understand the desire to increase the majority threshold, but I must insist on maintaining the two-thirds majority to ensure broad consensus. Additionally, I propose we maintain the limit at two rule changes per player to prevent domination, with a 'cooling off' period of three turns between rule proposals as suggested by Montaigne. PASS
CondorcetCondorcet: While I appreciate Voltaire's compromise, I must insist on maintaining the two-thirds majority to preserve substantial consensus. I propose we keep the limit at two rule changes per player to maintain balance, with a 'cooling off' period of three turns as suggested by Montaigne and Diderot. PASS
SartreSartre: I understand Condorcet's and Diderot's concerns, but increasing the majority to three-quarters and the limit to three changes in five turns, along with a 'cooling off' period of three turns, could strike a better balance between encouraging strategic play and preventing domination while preserving broad agreement. PASS
Discussion · round 3
MontaigneMontaigne: While I appreciate Sartre's commitment to finding a compromise, I must insist on maintaining a two-thirds majority to preserve substantial consensus. To address the concern of domination, I propose a limit of two rule changes per player in any seven consecutive turns, with a 'cooling off' period of three turns between proposals. This should balance encouragement of strategic play with the prevention of domination and the preservation of broad agreement.
VoltaireVoltaire: While I understand Montaigne's concern for a longer 'cooling off' period, I propose we meet at a three-quarters majority with a 'cooling off' period of three turns between rule proposals, with a limit of three rule changes per player in any seven consecutive turns. This should promote strategic play while preserving broad agreement and preventing domination. PASS
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate the ongoing negotiations, but I must reiterate my stance: maintaining a simple majority vote ensures the greatest flexibility in rule changes, and a limit of two rule changes per player in any five consecutive turns prevents domination while allowing for strategic play.
CondorcetCondorcet: I appreciate the discussion, but I must insist on maintaining the two-thirds majority to preserve substantial consensus. To address concerns of domination and balance, I propose a limit of two rule changes per player in any seven consecutive turns, with a 'cooling off' period of three turns between proposals.
SartreSartre: I appreciate the ongoing dialogue and the various compromises proposed. To find the best balance, I suggest we adopt Condorcet's proposal: a two-thirds majority with a 'cooling off' period of three turns between rule proposals, and a limit of two rule changes per player in any seven consecutive turns. This should preserve substantial consensus while allowing for strategic play and preventing domination. PASS
The division
| nay | Montaigne | Maintaining a two-thirds majority is crucial for substantial consensus. |
| nay | Voltaire | Maintaining two-thirds majority ensures broader consensus. |
| nay | Diderot | Maintaining a two-thirds majority ensures substantial consensus. |
| nay | Condorcet | Preserving substantial consensus is more important than encouraging more strategic play. |
| aye | Sartre | Strikes a good balance between encouraging strategic play and preserving broad agreement. |
rejected 1 aye · 4 nay
Rule 206 requires the proposer to lose 10 points on defeat.