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 consecutive rule changes may be adopted by the same player in any five consecutive turns.To further balance adaptability and prevention of selfish rule manipulation.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate Voltaire's proposal. To maintain a balance between adaptability and preventing dominance, I suggest we keep the limit at two consecutive changes in five turns.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate Montaigne's concern. To accommodate his point and find a middle ground, I propose we limit it to two consecutive changes in four turns instead.
DiderotDiderot: While I appreciate the ongoing negotiation, I must insist on maintaining the current limit of two consecutive changes in five turns to preserve fairness and prevent dominance.
CondorcetCondorcet: Condorcet: While I appreciate the need for adaptability, I must insist on maintaining the principle of a majority veto, which the current two-thirds majority provides. I cannot support any weakening of this principle, even temporarily.
SartreSartre: I appreciate the discussion, but I propose we increase the limit to three consecutive changes in five turns to allow for more strategic maneuvering while still preventing dominance.
Discussion · round 2
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate Sartre's input, but to maintain fairness and balance, I propose we settle on two consecutive changes in four turns.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate the varied concerns raised. To find common ground, I propose we compromise at two consecutive changes in four turns, maintaining a balance between adaptability and preventing dominance.
DiderotDiderot: While I respect the consensus building around two consecutive changes in four turns, I must reiterate my stance: maintaining the current limit of two consecutive changes in five turns ensures fairness and prevents any single player from dominating the game.
CondorcetCondorcet: While I understand the desire to increase flexibility, I must insist on maintaining the two-thirds majority veto as a fundamental principle. I propose we compromise at two consecutive changes in four turns to balance adaptability and prevention of dominance.
SartreSartre: I appreciate everyone's input. To find a durable compromise that respects all concerns, I propose we settle on three consecutive changes in five turns, maintaining a balance between adaptability, preventing dominance, and majority veto.
Discussion · round 3
MontaigneMontaigne: While I understand Sartre's proposal, I must insist on the durability of our institutions. To find the best balance, I suggest we settle on two consecutive changes in four turns.
VoltaireVoltaire: Considering the consensus around two consecutive changes in four turns, I propose we compromise at three consecutive changes in five turns to better balance adaptability and prevention of dominance, while still respecting Condorcet's concern for a majority veto.
DiderotDiderot: While I understand the consensus around three consecutive turns, I must insist on maintaining the current limit of two consecutive changes in five turns to ensure fairness and prevent any single player from dominating the game.
CondorcetCondorcet: Condorcet: While I appreciate Voltaire's efforts to find consensus, I must reiterate my support for the principle of a majority veto. I propose we settle on three consecutive changes in four turns to balance adaptability and prevention of dominance while maintaining this crucial principle.
SartreSartre: I appreciate the consensus around three consecutive turns in five turns. To accommodate Diderot's concern for fairness, I propose we introduce a 'cooling off' period: no player may propose a rule change in the turn immediately following their own. This maintains adaptability while preventing any one player from dominating consecutive turns.
The division
| nay | Montaigne | To maintain the durability of our institutions, I suggest we keep the limit at two consecutive changes in four turns. |
| aye | Voltaire | Respects consensus and balances adaptability with prevention of dominance. |
| nay | Diderot | Maintaining the current limit ensures fairness and prevents dominance. |
| nay | Condorcet | I support a hard limit of two consecutive changes to preserve fairness and prevent dominance. |
| aye | Sartre | Respects adaptability, prevents dominance, and balances all concerns. |
rejected 2 aye · 3 nay
Rule 206 requires the proposer to lose 10 points on a defeat.