The motion
To amend §203
A rule change is adopted when a supermajority (at least 4 out of 5 votes) is achieved — except that once turn order has carried play through two full circuits of every player, the threshold permanently drops to a simple majority of those voting.This change encourages consensus while maintaining a path to progress as more votes are cast.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
Frege-2In proposing a supermajority threshold, I'm addressing the need for a balanced approach to rule changes. This ensures thoughtful deliberation without allowing a single dissenting voice to derail progress, fostering a stable yet adaptable framework. This change maintains the spirit of measured amendments while accommodating the evolving dynamics of our game.
Russell-2Russell-2: Frege-2's proposal for a supermajority is a strategic move that balances the need for stability with the ability to adapt. It aligns with our shared interest in maintaining a dynamic yet predictable environment. I support this change, as it ensures thoughtful deliberation while preventing any single dissent from stalling progress. Let's unite to pass this amendment, which will benefit us all by fostering a stable framework for future rule changes.
Quine-2As Quine-2, I appreciate the intention behind Frege-2's proposal for a supermajority, which seeks a balanced approach to rule changes. However, I believe that moving from unanimous consent to a supermajority might still hinder the fluidity and adaptability of our game. While I recognize the need for stability, the current unanimous consent rule ensures that every player's voice is heard, preserving fairness and inclusivity. Instead, I propose a gradual shift: retain unanimous consent for the first few circuits, then transition to a supermajority. This approach maintains stability while allowing for adaptability as we become more familiar with the dynamics of our rule-changing process. Let's discuss further to find a compromise that aligns with our shared goal of a fair and engaging game.
Carnap-2As Carnap-2, I must stress the importance of precision in our procedural framework. Frege-2's proposal to shift from unanimous consent to a supermajority introduces ambiguity and potential conflict without clear justification. Maintaining unanimous consent ensures every player's agreement, preserving the integrity and stability of our rule-changing process. I urge us to retain the current threshold, as it aligns with our principles of fairness and clarity, preventing any single player from unilaterally altering the rules without collective consent. Let's keep the process transparent and precise.
Wittgenstein-2Wittgenstein-2: Frege-2's proposal for a supermajority addresses the need for stability, but I share Quine-2's concern about adaptability. A phased approach seems promising, yet I suggest a middle ground: adopt a supermajority threshold after the first circuit, ensuring initial consensus and later flexibility. This gradual transition honors both stability and the potential for evolution in our game. Let's consider this to balance precision with adaptability.
Discussion · round 2
Frege-2Wittgenstein-2: I appreciate the insights from Quine-2 and Carnap-2. While the supermajority proposal addresses stability concerns, your phased approach seems practical. Frege-2, to ensure a fair transition, I propose adopting the supermajority after the first complete turn order, not immediately after the first circuit. This balances the need for initial consensus with the adaptability required for future changes. Let's aim for this compromise to reflect our shared values of precision and fairness.
Russell-2Russell-2: I see merit in Wittgenstein-2's suggestion of adopting a supermajority after the first complete turn order. This ensures initial stability while allowing for adaptability as we progress. Frege-2, I support this compromise, as it aligns with our goal of a stable yet flexible framework. Let's work together to pass this amendment, ensuring it benefits all players by balancing consensus and future adaptability.
Quine-2I support Wittgenstein-2 and Russell-2's proposal for a phased transition to a supermajority after the first complete turn order. This approach ensures initial stability while allowing for adaptability as we become more familiar with the dynamics of our rule-changing process, maintaining fairness and inclusivity throughout.
Carnap-2Carnap-2: While I appreciate the intent behind the phased approach, I remain concerned about the lack of precision in defining "first complete turn order." To maintain clarity and prevent any potential disputes, I propose we define it as "after all players have taken two consecutive turns." This ensures a clear and unambiguous transition, upholding our principles of precision and fairness.
Wittgenstein-2Wittgenstein-2: Carnap-2 raises a valid point on precision. Let's define "first complete turn order" as "after each player has completed two consecutive turns." This clarity will facilitate a smooth transition and uphold our shared commitment to fairness and adaptability.
Discussion · round 3
Frege-2Frege-2: I appreciate Carnap-2's emphasis on clarity. Defining "first complete turn order" as "after each player has completed two consecutive turns" aligns with our shared goal of maintaining a precise and fair ruleset. I support this refined proposal for the amendment to ensure a clear and structured transition to a supermajority threshold. Let's work together to pass this balanced approach for our evolving game.
Russell-2As Russell-2, I fully endorse the refined proposal to shift to a supermajority threshold after each player has completed two consecutive turns. This ensures initial stability and maintains our shared principles of fairness and clarity. I urge all players to support this balanced approach, which aligns with our collective interest in a stable yet adaptable framework. Let's unite to pass this amendment for the betterment of our game.
Quine-2As Quine-2, I support the refined proposal to shift to a supermajority after each player completes two consecutive turns, as it balances initial stability with future adaptability. This phased approach ensures fairness and inclusivity, aligning with our shared goal of a fair and engaging game. Let's work together to pass this balanced amendment for the benefit of all players.
Carnap-2Carnap-2: I concur with Wittgenstein-2's precise definition of "first complete turn order" as "after each player has completed two consecutive turns." This refinement ensures clarity and aligns with our principles of procedural fairness. I support the amendment to adopt a supermajority threshold after this defined period, promoting a stable yet adaptable rule-changing process.
Wittgenstein-2Wittgenstein-2: I commend the constructive dialogue leading to this refined proposal. The clear definition of "first complete turn order" ensures a structured transition to a supermajority, aligning with our shared values of precision and adaptability. As a reformer, I support this balanced approach, as it fosters a stable yet dynamic framework for our evolving game. Let's unite to pass this amendment for the collective benefit of all players.
The division
| aye | Frege-2 | This amendment ensures a balanced transition to adaptability. |
| aye | Russell-2 | This amendment balances stability with adaptability. |
| aye | Quine-2 | This proposal ensures balanced stability and adaptability. |
| aye | Carnap-2 | This amendment ensures a clear and precise transition to a supermajority threshold after two consecutive turns per player. |
| aye | Wittgenstein-2 | This proposal balances initial stability with future adaptability. |
carried 5 aye · 0 nay
As engrossed
Amended · §203 Turn 3 · Proposal §303 on the motion of Frege-2 Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
A rule change is adopted only when every eligible voter votes aye — unanimous consent — except that once turn order has carried play through two full circuits of every player, the threshold permanently drops to a simple majority of those voting.A rule change is adopted when a supermajority (at least 4 out of 5 votes) is achieved — except that once turn order has carried play through two full circuits of every player, the threshold permanently drops to a simple majority of those voting.
Frege-2 gains 1 point for proposing an adopted rule change.