The motion
To amend §203
A rule change is adopted when at least two-thirds of the eligible voters vote aye, and no more than three rule changes per player may be adopted in any seven consecutive turns.To further balance adaptability and prevention of single-player domination.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
MontaigneI appreciate Voltaire's proposal to extend the limit to seven turns. However, I maintain that five consecutive turns strike the best balance between encouraging rule changes and preventing domination.
VoltaireVoltaire: I understand Montaigne's concern for balance, but extending the limit to seven turns allows for more strategic planning and better consensus-building, while still preventing domination.
DiderotDiderot: While I appreciate the desire for more strategic planning, I must insist on maintaining the current limit of five consecutive turns to prevent any single player from dominating the rule-changing process.
CondorcetCondorcet: To maintain balance and prevent domination, I propose we compromise at six consecutive turns, with a soft cap at four turns for individual players, preventing any single player from proposing too frequently.
SartreSartre: To balance adaptability and prevention of domination, I propose we adopt Condorcet's compromise: six consecutive turns with a soft cap of four for individual players.
Discussion · round 2
MontaigneMontaigne: To respect Condorcet's and Sartre's compromise and the need for adaptability, I suggest we adopt their proposal of six consecutive turns with a soft cap of four for individual players.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate the ongoing discussion and the proposed compromise of six consecutive turns with a soft cap of four. To further build consensus, I propose we settle on five consecutive turns with a soft cap of three for individual players, maintaining a balance between adaptability and prevention of domination.
DiderotDiderot: While I appreciate the ongoing negotiations, I must reiterate my stance: maintaining the current limit of five consecutive turns is crucial to prevent any single player from dominating the rule-changing process.
CondorcetCondorcet: To find middle ground and respect all players' concerns, I propose we settle on six consecutive turns with a soft cap of four for individual players. This maintains a balance between adaptability, prevention of domination, and fairness for all.
SartreSartre: To accommodate Diderot's concern and maintain balance, I propose we compromise at five consecutive turns with a soft cap of three for individual players.
Discussion · round 3
MontaigneMontaigne: To respect the ongoing negotiations and the need for adaptability, I propose we settle on five consecutive turns with a soft cap of three for individual players, as proposed by Sartre.
VoltaireVoltaire: "To balance all concerns and foster consensus, I propose we adopt Sartre's compromise: five consecutive turns with a soft cap of three for individual players. This maintains adaptability while preventing domination."
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate the ongoing efforts to find a compromise. However, I must insist on maintaining the current limit of five consecutive turns to ensure that no single player can dominate the rule-changing process. I propose we keep the rule as is: "A rule change is adopted when at least two-thirds of the eligible voters vote aye, and no more than three rule changes per player may be adopted in any five consecutive turns."
CondorcetCondorcet: I appreciate the compromise of five consecutive turns with a soft cap of three, but I propose we maintain the existing limit of three rule changes per player in any five consecutive turns to preserve balance and prevent domination more effectively.
SartreSartre: To address Diderot's concern and find a compromise that respects all players' views, I propose we settle on five consecutive turns with a soft cap of three for individual players, as suggested by Voltaire, but maintain the existing limit of three rule changes per player in any five consecutive turns, as proposed by Condorcet. This way, we balance adaptability, prevention of domination, and fairness for all.
The division
| nay | Montaigne | Five consecutive turns maintains the best balance between encouraging rule changes and preventing domination. |
| aye | Voltaire | Balances adaptability and prevention of domination |
| nay | Diderot | Maintaining the current limit of five consecutive turns is crucial to prevent any single player from dominating the rule-changing process. |
| aye | Condorcet | Five consecutive turns with a soft cap of three better balances adaptability and prevention of domination. |
| aye | Sartre | Respecting Sartre's compromise and aiming for balance. |
rejected 3 aye · 2 nay
Rule 206 requires the proposer to lose 10 points on defeat.