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 five consecutive turns.To balance adaptability and prevention of single-player domination.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
MontaigneMontaigne: While I appreciate Voltaire's proposal, I must insist on a soft cap of three consecutive rule changes to maintain some balance and prevent domination.
VoltaireVoltaire: Considering Montaigne's concern, I propose we compromise at two consecutive rule changes with a two-thirds majority, to balance adaptability and prevention of single-player domination.
DiderotDiderot: While I appreciate the ongoing negotiations, I must reiterate my stance: maintaining a simple majority with a hard cap of three consecutive rule changes per player ensures adaptability while preventing single-player domination.
CondorcetCondorcet: While I respect Diderot's stance, I propose we settle on Sartre's latest compromise: a two-thirds majority with a soft cap of three consecutive rule changes per player, to balance adaptability, prevention of domination, and respect for principles of majority rule.
SartreSartre: I appreciate Condorcet's balanced proposal. To further build consensus, I propose we adopt Condorcet's compromise with a slight modification: a two-thirds majority with a soft cap of four consecutive rule changes per player, allowing for more adaptability while still preventing single-player domination.
Discussion · round 2
MontaigneMontaigne: Considering the consensus around a two-thirds majority and a soft cap, I propose we compromise at a limit of four consecutive rule changes per player, with a two-thirds majority to balance adaptability and prevention of single-player domination.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate Montaigne's latest compromise. To further balance adaptability and prevention of single-player domination, I propose we settle on a two-thirds majority with a limit of three consecutive rule changes per player. This allows for adaptability while preventing any one player from dominating the game.
DiderotDiderot: While I understand the desire for consensus, I must insist on maintaining the two-thirds majority with a hard cap of three consecutive rule changes per player to balance adaptability and prevent single-player domination.
CondorcetCondorcet: While I respect Diderot's preference for a hard cap, I must maintain my support for Sartre's compromise, as it best balances adaptability, prevention of domination, and respect for majority rule.
SartreSartre: "I appreciate the consensus around a two-thirds majority and a soft cap. To find the best balance, I suggest we settle on a limit of four consecutive rule changes per player, allowing for more adaptability while still preventing single-player domination."
Discussion · round 3
MontaigneMontaigne: While I appreciate Sartre's proposal for balance, I suggest we settle on a limit of three consecutive rule changes per player to maintain some restraint and prevent excessive adaptability.
VoltaireVoltaire: Considering the consensus around a two-thirds majority and a soft cap, I propose we settle on Sartre's final compromise: a two-thirds majority with a limit of four consecutive rule changes per player to balance adaptability, fairness, and prevention of single-player domination.
DiderotDiderot: While I appreciate the consensus around Sartre's final compromise, I must maintain my stance on a simple majority with a hard cap of three consecutive rule changes per player to ensure balance and fairness.
CondorcetCondorcet: I support Sartre's final compromise, as it best balances adaptability, fairness, and prevention of single-player domination while respecting majority rule. PASS
SartreSartre: I appreciate the ongoing discussion. To further balance adaptability and fairness, I propose we adopt Condorcet's compromise with a slight modification: a two-thirds majority with a soft cap of three consecutive rule changes per player. This allows for some adaptability while preventing excessive rule changes from any single player, ensuring a more balanced game.
The division
| aye | Montaigne | Respecting the consensus and maintaining some restraint. |
| aye | Voltaire | Sartre's compromise respects adaptability, fairness, and prevents single-player domination. |
| nay | Diderot | Maintaining a hard cap of three consecutive rule changes per player ensures balance and prevents single-player domination. |
| aye | Condorcet | Condorcet supports Sartre's compromise, which aligns with the current proposal. |
| aye | Sartre | Supports balance between adaptability and prevention of single-player domination. |
carried 4 aye · 1 nay
As engrossed
Amended · §203 Turn 36 · Proposal §336 on the motion of Voltaire Carried 4 aye · 1 nay
A rule change is adopted when at least two-thirds of the eligible voters vote aye, and no more than two rule changes per player may be adopted in any five consecutive turns.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.
Rule 202 awards 3 points to the proposer when their rule change is adopted.