The motion
To amend §203
A rule change is adopted when at least four-fifths of the eligible voters vote aye.To maintain strong consensus while encouraging innovation
The floor
Discussion · round 1
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate Voltaire's proposal to increase the voting threshold, but I believe that four-fifths may be too stringent, potentially hindering progress. I propose we settle on a three-quarters majority instead.
VoltaireVoltaire: "I appreciate Montaigne's compromise suggestion. To build further consensus, I propose we meet at a three-fifths majority, balancing progress with substantial agreement."
DiderotDiderot: While I understand the need for a higher threshold to maintain consensus, I believe a three-fifths majority may still be too lenient. I propose we settle at a two-thirds majority, as it balances progress with substantial agreement while preventing too rapid a change in rules.
CondorcetCondorcet: While I appreciate the concern for consensus, a three-fifths majority may be too low. I propose we maintain a two-thirds threshold, as it strikes a balance between progress and substantial agreement.
SartreSartre: I understand the concern for consensus, but a two-thirds majority may still allow for too much volatility. I propose we settle at a three-quarters majority, as it encourages broad agreement while still allowing for necessary rule changes.
Discussion · round 2
MontaigneMontaigne: While I respect the desire for higher thresholds, I must reiterate my support for a three-quarters majority. It encourages broad agreement without stifling necessary changes. Let us compromise at this point to move the game forward. PASS
VoltaireVoltaire: "In the spirit of compromise, I propose we adopt Condorcet's amendment of a two-thirds majority, as it balances progress and consensus effectively. Let us build on the progress we've made thus far." PASS
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate the ongoing dialogue, but I must reiterate my stance: a two-thirds majority vote best balances progress with substantial consensus. Let us not compromise on this principle for the sake of expediency.
CondorcetCondorcet: Condorcet: While I appreciate the compromise, I remain steadfast in my support for a two-thirds majority. It maintains a balance between progress and substantial agreement, ensuring that changes are made with significant consensus.
SartreSartre: I respect Diderot's and Condorcet's stance on maintaining a two-thirds majority. To find common ground, I propose we adopt a three-fifths majority, which encourages broad agreement without impeding necessary changes. This threshold balances progress with substantial consensus, allowing us to move forward together. PASS
Discussion · round 3
MontaigneMontaigne: I respect Sartre's attempt to find common ground, but I maintain that a three-quarters majority strikes the best balance between encouraging broad agreement and allowing necessary changes. Let us not settle for less than what ensures substantial consensus. PASS
VoltaireVoltaire: "I appreciate the wide range of proposals and the commitment to finding common ground. To build upon the progress we've made, I propose we adopt a four-fifths majority for rule changes, allowing for significant consensus while still permitting necessary evolution."
DiderotDiderot: I understand Voltaire's proposal aims to maintain a high threshold for consensus, but a four-fifths majority may be too stringent for a game with five players. I propose we settle at a three-quarters majority, which still encourages substantial agreement while being more practical for our group size. PASS
CondorcetCondorcet: Maintaining a two-thirds majority ensures substantial consensus without hindering progress. I propose we stick to this threshold for adopting rule changes. PASS
SartreSartre: "I appreciate the concern for consensus, but let's not stall progress with an impractically high threshold. I propose we compromise at a three-quarters majority, which still encourages significant agreement while allowing for necessary changes. PASS"
The division
| nay | Montaigne | Four-fifths is too stringent for our group size and may hinder progress. |
| nay | Voltaire | Four-fifths may hinder progress excessively. |
| nay | Diderot | A four-fifths majority may hinder progress with our group size. |
| nay | Condorcet | Too stringent, hinders progress. |
| nay | Sartre | Four-fifths majority too stringent for practical progress with five players. |
rejected 0 aye · 5 nay
Rule 206 requires the proposer to lose 10 points on defeat.