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 two consecutive rule changes may be adopted by the same player in any five consecutive turns.To maintain a balance between adaptability and durability.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate Voltaire's proposal, but I must insist on maintaining the current limit of two consecutive changes to preserve durability and fairness.
VoltaireVoltaire: Considering the consensus around two consecutive changes in four turns, I propose we compromise at two consecutive changes in five turns to further build consensus.
DiderotDiderot: While I appreciate the ongoing negotiations, I must insist on maintaining the current limit of two consecutive changes to ensure adaptability and prevent any single player from dominating the game.
CondorcetCondorcet: I appreciate the ongoing discussion, but I must insist on the principle of majority rule. A simple majority should suffice for adopting rule changes.
SartreSartre: I understand the concerns of maintaining durability and adaptability, but I propose we adopt Condorcet's principle of majority rule. A simple majority should indeed suffice for adopting rule changes. To address the concern of preventing dominance, we could introduce a rule that no player may propose more than one rule change in any three consecutive turns. This way, we balance the need for adaptability with the prevention of player dominance.
Discussion · round 2
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate Sartre's proposal for a balance between adaptability and prevention of dominance. To maintain durability, I suggest we settle on a limit of two consecutive changes in four turns, as it balances adaptability and fairness.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate Montaigne's and Condorcet's compromise. To accommodate everyone's concerns, I propose we adopt Sartre's compromise: a simple majority for rule adoption, and a limit of one rule change per player in any three consecutive turns to prevent dominance.
DiderotDiderot: While I understand the appeal of a simple majority and the prevention of dominance, I must insist on maintaining a two-thirds majority threshold for rule adoption to ensure stability and prevent hasty decisions.
CondorcetCondorcet: I appreciate Sartre's and Voltaire's efforts to find a balance. To respect the principle of majority rule and maintain adaptability, I propose we adopt a simple majority for rule adoption, along with a limit of one rule change per player in any three consecutive turns. This maintains a balance between adaptability and the prevention of dominance.
SartreSartre: "To address Diderot's concern for stability, I propose a compromise: maintain the two-thirds majority for rule adoption, but introduce a limit of one rule change per player in any three consecutive turns to prevent dominance and promote fairness. This way, we balance adaptability, stability, and equity."
Discussion · round 3
MontaigneMontaigne: "I appreciate Sartre's latest compromise. To maintain durability of our institutions, I suggest we settle on a limit of two consecutive changes in four turns, as it balances adaptability and fairness while keeping the two-thirds majority."
VoltaireVoltaire: "In the spirit of compromise, I propose we adopt Sartre's latest proposal: maintain the two-thirds majority for rule adoption and introduce a limit of one rule change per player in any three consecutive turns, with a cap of two consecutive changes in four turns to maintain fairness and adaptability."
DiderotDiderot: Diderot: While I appreciate the ongoing negotiations, I must insist on maintaining the current two-thirds majority threshold and the limit of two consecutive changes in five turns to ensure stability and prevent hasty decisions. I am open to discussing other aspects of the proposal.
CondorcetCondorcet: I appreciate the ongoing negotiations, but I must insist on the principle of majority rule. A simple majority should suffice for adopting rule changes, and to prevent dominance, we should limit each player to one rule change every three turns.
SartreSartre: I appreciate the ongoing discussion and the compromises proposed. To balance adaptability, stability, and equity, I propose we adopt a two-thirds majority for rule adoption, a limit of one rule change per player in any three consecutive turns, and a cap of two consecutive changes in four turns. This way, we maintain a balance between adaptability, stability, and equity. PASS
The division
| nay | Montaigne | To preserve durability and fairness |
| aye | Voltaire | Supports Voltaire's proposal as a reasonable compromise |
| nay | Diderot | Maintaining the current limit of two consecutive changes in five turns ensures stability and prevents hasty decisions. |
| nay | Condorcet | Two-thirds majority is sufficient, but I insist on the principle of majority rule for rule adoption. |
| aye | Sartre | Sartre's proposal balances adaptability, stability, and equity. |
rejected 2 aye · 3 nay
Rule 206 requires the proposer to lose 10 points on defeat.