Turns 14–32 · most recent first · page 2 of 3
moves to add a new rule(mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.7: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with less than 3 ayes must lose 5 points.
Discussion · round 1
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate Sartre's proposal, but let's not make the penalty too harsh for a simple majority. I propose we reduce it to 3 points instead of 5.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate both Sartre's and Montaigne's perspectives. To find a middle ground that discourages rushed proposals without being too harsh, I propose we set the penalty at 4 points for less than 3 ayes.
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate Montaigne's and Voltaire's concerns for balance. To maintain a clear disincentive for rushed proposals while being fair, I suggest we set the penalty at 4 points for less than 3 ayes, as Voltaire proposed, but also add a 1-point bonus for each additional 'aye' beyond the first 3, up to a maximum of 7 points. This encourages broader consensus while still penalizing rushed proposals.
CondorcetCondorcet: PASS. I support the consensus emerging around a 4-point penalty for less than 3 ayes, as proposed by Voltaire and Diderot.
SartreSartre: I appreciate the concerns raised, but I maintain that a 5-point penalty is necessary to discourage rushed proposals that do not gain broad support. While I understand the desire for a bonus system, I believe it could create an incentive for strategic voting rather than genuine consensus. Let's not overcomplicate the matter. PASS.
Discussion · round 2
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate Sartre's persistence, but a 5-point penalty seems harsh. I suggest we settle on Voltaire's proposal of 4 points, which balances discouragement with fairness. PASS.
VoltaireVoltaire: To maintain balance and fairness, I propose we settle on 3 points lost for less than 3 ayes, as suggested by Montaigne. This penalty discourages rushed proposals without being too harsh.
DiderotDiderot: I understand Voltaire's compromise, but to maintain a clear disincentive for rushed proposals and encourage broader consensus, I propose we settle on 4 points lost for less than 3 ayes, as initially proposed by Sartre, with a 1-point bonus for each additional 'aye' beyond the first 3, up to a maximum of 7 points. This way, we penalize rushed proposals while rewarding genuine consensus. PASS.
CondorcetCondorcet: I understand Diderot's proposal, but I fear it encourages strategic voting rather than genuine consensus. Let's keep the penalty simple and clear: 4 points for less than 3 ayes, as proposed by Voltaire.
SartreSartre: While I appreciate the concern for simplicity, Diderot's proposal strikes a fair balance between discouraging rushed proposals and encouraging broad consensus. I'm willing to accept 4 points for less than 3 ayes with the added bonus for further consensus. PASS.
Discussion · round 3
MontaigneMontaigne: While I understand the concern for encouraging consensus, let's not make the penalty too harsh for a simple majority. I propose we settle on 3 points lost for less than 3 ayes, as proposed by Voltaire, to balance discouragement with fairness. PASS.
VoltaireVoltaire: To find common ground, I propose we vote on Diderot's amendment for 4 points lost for less than 3 ayes, with a 1-point bonus for each additional 'aye' beyond the first 3, up to a maximum of 7 points.
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate Voltaire's proposal to vote on my amendment. To address Condorcet's concern about strategic voting, let's cap the bonus at 3 points for 6 or more ayes, rather than 7. This maintains a clear disincentive for rushed proposals while encouraging broader consensus without excessive bonuses. PASS.
CondorcetCondorcet: To balance discouragement and encouragement, I propose we settle on a 3-point penalty for less than 3 ayes, with no bonus system. This maintains simplicity while still addressing rushed proposals. PASS.
SartreSartre: I understand Condorcet's preference for simplicity, but I believe Diderot's compromise proposal strikes a better balance. Let's vote on Diderot's amended rule with a 3-point bonus cap for 6 or more ayes. PASS.
The division
MontaignenayThe penalty is too harsh for a simple majority.
VoltaireayeIt maintains balance and discourages rushed proposals while being fair.
DiderotnayThe penalty is too harsh and does not encourage broader consensus.
CondorcetnayThe proposed penalty is too harsh for a simple majority.
SartreayeDiderot's compromise proposal strikes a better balance.
rejected 2 aye · 3 nay
Rule 206 requires the proposer to lose 10 points on defeat.
Turn 31Condorcetcarried
moves to amend §303(mutable) A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with less than 4 ayes must lose 1.5 points.
Discussion · round 1
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate Condorcet's attempt to find a middle ground. To further encourage consensus, let's round up to 2 points lost for less than 4 ayes.
DiderotDiderot: While I appreciate Condorcet's and Voltaire's efforts to find a balance, I propose a slight adjustment to 1.5 points lost for less than 4 ayes. This maintains a clear threshold while encouraging broader participation.
CondorcetCondorcet: I appreciate Voltaire's and Diderot's input. To maintain balance and precision, I propose we compromise at 1.5 points lost for less than 4 ayes, as Diderot suggested.
SartreSartre: PASS
Discussion · round 2
MontaigneMontaigne: While I appreciate the ongoing efforts to find a middle ground, I must insist on maintaining a clear incentive for consensus. I propose we stick with 2 points lost for less than 4 ayes, as Voltaire initially suggested.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate the ongoing dialogue. To find a middle ground that respects everyone's input and encourages consensus, let's vote on Diderot's proposal of 1.5 points lost for less than 4 ayes.
DiderotDiderot: Diderot: I appreciate Voltaire's suggestion to vote on my proposal. To encourage broader participation while maintaining a clear threshold, let's vote on 1.5 points lost for less than 4 ayes.
CondorcetCondorcet: I understand the value of encouraging consensus, but I must insist on the precision of 1.5 points lost for less than 4 ayes. Let's vote on Diderot's proposal as a compromise that respects everyone's input.
SartreSartre: PASS
Discussion · round 3
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate the compromise proposed by Diderot and supported by Condorcet. To encourage consensus and maintain balance, I vote for Diderot's proposal of 1.5 points lost for less than 4 ayes.
VoltaireVoltaire: I agree with Diderot's proposal of 1.5 points lost for less than 4 ayes, as it strikes a balance between encouraging consensus and penalizing rushed proposals. PASS.
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate the growing consensus around 1.5 points lost for less than 4 ayes. To encourage broader participation and maintain fairness, let's vote on this compromise proposal. PASS
CondorcetCondorcet: I appreciate the consensus building around 1.5 points lost for less than 4 ayes. To maintain fairness and encourage broader participation, I vote for Diderot's proposal. PASS.
SartreSartre: I appreciate the compromise at 1.5 points lost for less than 4 ayes. To encourage ongoing dialogue and maintain balance, let's vote on Condorcet's proposal to amend [303] as written. PASS.
The division
MontaigneayeMaintains a clear threshold while encouraging broader participation.
VoltaireayeRespecting Condorcet's compromise to maintain balance and encourage broader participation.
DiderotayeEncourages broader participation while maintaining a clear threshold.
CondorcetayeMaintains balance and encourages broader participation.
SartreayeCompromise that encourages consensus and maintains balance.
carried 5 aye · 0 nay
game-master verdict discarded (verdict op 'amend' targets a rule number not in the ruleset: 303); the proposal's own targets were also unusable, nothing applied
moves to amend §303(mutable) A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with less than 4 ayes must lose 2 points.
Discussion · round 1
MontaigneMontaigne: While I understand the intent to maintain a threshold, a 2-point penalty might be too lenient. I propose 1 point as a fair compromise.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate Montaigne's proposal. To encourage more consensus, I suggest we compromise at 1.5 points lost for less than 4 ayes.
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate Montaigne's and Voltaire's proposals. To maintain a clear threshold and encourage broader consensus, I suggest we meet in the middle at a 1.5-point penalty for less than 4 ayes.
CondorcetCondorcet: I appreciate the compromise at 1.5 points, but to maintain the spirit of the original proposal, I propose we stick with 2 points for less than 4 ayes.
SartreSartre: Sartre: I appreciate Diderot's and Condorcet's points. To find a balance that respects the threshold and encourages broader consensus, I propose we vote on Diderot's amendment for a 1.5-point penalty for less than 4 ayes.
Discussion · round 2
MontaigneMontaigne: While I understand Condorcet's sentiment, I propose we accept Diderot's compromise of a 1.5-point penalty for less than 4 ayes to encourage broader consensus without being too lenient.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate the growing consensus around a 1.5-point penalty for less than 4 ayes. To maintain balance and encourage broader participation, let's vote on this proposal.
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate the consensus building around a 1.5-point penalty for less than 4 ayes. Let's vote on this proposal to maintain balance and encourage broader participation. PASS
CondorcetCondorcet: PASS
SartreSartre: A compromise of 1.5 points lost for less than 4 ayes respects the threshold and encourages broader participation without being too harsh. Let's vote on Diderot's amendment. PASS
Discussion · round 3
MontaignePASS. I agree that 1.5 points is a fair compromise that encourages consensus without being too lenient.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate the consensus around 1.5 points lost for less than 4 ayes. To encourage further discussion and negotiation, let's vote on this proposal with the understanding that it can be revisited in the future if needed. PASS
CondorcetCondorcet: While I appreciate the compromise at 1.5 points, I must maintain my vote for 2 points as it better upholds the principle of a clear threshold for consensus. PASS
SartreSartre: I appreciate Condorcet's commitment to principle, but I must reiterate that a 1.5-point penalty for less than 4 ayes strikes a better balance between encouraging consensus and maintaining a threshold. Let's vote on Diderot's amendment. PASS
The division
MontaigneayeTo encourage broader consensus without being too lenient.
VoltaireayeA fair compromise that encourages consensus without being too lenient.
DiderotayeTo encourage broader participation and maintain a clear threshold.
CondorcetayeA compromise that maintains a threshold and encourages broader consensus.
SartreayeA 1.5-point penalty balances encouraging consensus and maintaining a threshold.
carried 5 aye · 0 nay
game-master verdict discarded (verdict op 'amend' targets a rule number not in the ruleset: 303); the proposal's own targets were also unusable, nothing applied
Turn 29Voltairecarried
moves to amend §303(mutable) A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with at least 3 ayes gains 1 extra point in addition to the roll.
Discussion · round 1
MontaigneMontaigne: While I appreciate the simplicity of Voltaire's proposal, I'd like to see it as 2 extra points for 4 ayes to better encourage broader consensus.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate Montaigne's concern for broader consensus. To find a middle ground that respects everyone's input, I propose we vote on 1 extra point for 3 ayes, with the possibility of further amendment.
DiderotDiderot: I support Voltaire's proposal for 1 extra point at 3 ayes. It strikes a balance between encouraging consensus and maintaining the current threshold.
CondorcetCondorcet: I agree with Voltaire's proposal. It maintains a reasonable incentive for consensus while being a balanced amendment to the current rule.
SartreSartre: I appreciate the focus on consensus, but let's not ignore the value of minority voices. I propose we amend Voltaire's rule to 2 extra points for 4 ayes, with an additional bonus for a supermajority.
Discussion · round 2
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate Sartre's concern for minority voices. To balance everyone's input, I propose we vote on Voltaire's amendment and, if passed, immediately consider a further amendment for additional bonuses at higher thresholds.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate the ongoing discussion and the various proposals. To find a middle ground that respects everyone's input, I propose we vote on 1 extra point for 3 ayes, with the possibility of further amendment.
DiderotDiderot: Diderot: I appreciate Voltaire's proposal for 1 extra point at 3 ayes, but to maintain a clear incentive for broader participation, I support Montaigne's proposal of 2 extra points for 4 ayes.
CondorcetCondorcet: I support Voltaire's proposal for 1 extra point at 3 ayes, as it strikes a balance between encouraging consensus and maintaining fairness for all players.
SartreSartre: I understand the desire for a simple majority, but to truly incentivize consensus, I propose we amend Voltaire's rule to 2 extra points for 4 ayes, with an additional bonus for a supermajority. This way, we balance encouraging broad participation while still rewarding those who build strong consensus.
Discussion · round 3
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate Sartre's emphasis on a supermajority bonus. To balance everyone's concerns, let's vote on 1 extra point for 3 ayes, and immediately afterwards consider an amendment for a 2-point bonus at 4 ayes, with additional bonuses for higher majorities.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate the ongoing dialogue. To find a middle ground that respects everyone's input, let's vote on 1 extra point for 3 ayes, and if it passes, immediately consider Sartre's amendment for additional bonuses at higher thresholds.
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate Voltaire's compromise proposal. To maintain a clear threshold and encourage broader participation, I suggest we vote on 1 extra point for 3 ayes, with the understanding that we will immediately consider Sartre's amendment for additional bonuses at higher thresholds if Voltaire's proposal passes.
CondorcetCondorcet: I support Voltaire's proposal for 1 extra point at 3 ayes, as it maintains a reasonable incentive for consensus while being a balanced amendment to the current rule. I'm open to discussing Sartre's proposal for additional bonuses at higher thresholds after Voltaire's amendment is voted on. PASS
SartreSartre: I appreciate the consensus building around 3 ayes for 1 extra point. To encourage broader participation and reward strong consensus, let's vote on Voltaire's amendment and immediately consider adding a 2-point bonus for 4 ayes and a 3-point bonus for 5 ayes. PASS
The division
MontaigneayeEncourages broader participation while maintaining balance.
VoltaireayeEncourages broader consensus while respecting minority voices.
DiderotayeEncourages consensus while maintaining fairness
CondorcetayeEncourages consensus while maintaining fairness.
SartreayeEncourages broader participation while maintaining fairness.
carried 5 aye · 0 nay
game-master verdict discarded (verdict op 'amend' targets a rule number not in the ruleset: 303); the proposal's own targets were also unusable, nothing applied
moves to add a new rule(mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.6: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with at least 6 ayes gains 1 bonus point for every extra 'aye' beyond the first 5.
Discussion · round 1
MontaigneMontaigne: Sartre's proposal is an interesting extension of the consensus bonus, but I fear it might overcomplicate the rule. I propose we keep the maximum bonus at 4 extra points, as agreed upon in the recent past.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate Montaigne's concern for simplicity. To balance this with encouraging even broader consensus, I propose we cap the bonus at 5 extra points for 6 ayes, with an extra point for each additional 'aye' up to 10. This maintains a clear threshold while still rewarding extensive agreement.
DiderotDiderot: While I appreciate Voltaire's compromise, I believe capping the bonus at 5 extra points for 6 ayes maintains a clear threshold while still encouraging extensive agreement, without the need for additional points beyond that. PASS
CondorcetCondorcet: As a proceduralist, I must oppose Sartre's proposal as it introduces a new threshold (6 ayes) without a corresponding penalty for less than 5 ayes, disrupting the symmetry of the consensus bonus and penalty system we've established. PASS
SartreSartre: While I understand Montaigne's and Condorcet's concerns, I believe that a bonus for broad consensus can incentivize more thoughtful proposals and thorough discussion. Let's not shy away from encouraging extensive agreement, as it can lead to better rules and more enjoyable play.
Discussion · round 2
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate Sartre's intention, but let's not encourage overcomplication. I propose we cap the bonus at 5 extra points for 6 ayes, as Voltaire suggested.
VoltaireVoltaire: "I appreciate Sartre's and Montaigne's perspectives. To find a middle ground, I propose we cap the bonus at 4 extra points for 6 ayes, maintaining simplicity while still rewarding extensive agreement. PASS"
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate the ongoing discussion and the various proposals. To maintain simplicity and fairness, I suggest we vote on Voltaire's amendment for a 4-point bonus for 6 ayes.
CondorcetCondorcet: As a proceduralist, I must insist on maintaining the symmetry of the bonus and penalty system. I propose we vote on Diderot's amendment to maintain the existing structure without introducing a new threshold. PASS
SartreSartre: While I appreciate the concern for simplicity, let's not miss the opportunity to reward broad consensus. I propose we vote on Voltaire's amendment for a 4-point bonus for 6 ayes, with a final vote on Diderot's amendment afterwards to maintain symmetry. PASS
Discussion · round 3
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate Sartre's willingness to compromise. To maintain balance and simplicity, I propose we vote first on Voltaire's amendment for a 4-point bonus for 6 ayes, followed by Condorcet's amendment to maintain the penalty structure. PASS
VoltaireVoltaire: "I appreciate the growing consensus around a 4-point bonus for 6 ayes. To maintain balance and encourage broader consensus, I propose we also introduce a 2-point penalty for less than 4 ayes, as previously discussed. This maintains the symmetry Condorcet values while still rewarding extensive agreement."
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate Voltaire's proposal to maintain symmetry and encourage broader consensus. To keep the penalty system simple and clear, I suggest we vote on Voltaire's amendment for a 4-point bonus for 6 ayes and a 2-point penalty for less than 4 ayes. PASS
CondorcetCondorcet: While I appreciate Voltaire's attempt to maintain symmetry, I must insist on keeping the penalty system simple and clear. I propose we vote separately on the bonus for 6 ayes and the penalty for less than 4 ayes, maintaining the existing structure without introducing new thresholds all at once. PASS
SartreSartre: While I understand Condorcet's concern for simplicity, let's not miss the opportunity to encourage extensive agreement. I propose we vote first on Voltaire's amendment for a 4-point bonus for 6 ayes, followed by Condorcet's amendment to maintain the penalty structure.
The division
MontaigneayeTo encourage extensive agreement
VoltaireayeEncourages broader consensus while maintaining simplicity.
DiderotayeEncourages extensive agreement while maintaining simplicity.
CondorcetayeTo encourage extensive agreement and thoughtful proposals.
SartreayeEncourages extensive agreement and thoughtful proposals
carried 5 aye · 0 nay
Rule 301 awards 1 bonus point for every extra 'aye' beyond the first 5, and there were 5 extra 'ayes'.
Turn 27Condorcetcarried
moves to amend §303(mutable) A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with 3 or fewer ayes must lose 2 points.
Discussion · round 1
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate Condorcet's proposal, but I must insist on a 1-point penalty for less than 4 ayes to maintain balance and encourage broader participation.
VoltaireVoltaire: I understand Montaigne's concern for balance, but to encourage broader consensus, I propose we meet at 2 points lost for less than 4 ayes.
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate both Montaigne's and Voltaire's perspectives. To maintain a clear threshold and encourage consensus, I propose we settle on a 2-point penalty for less than 4 ayes.
CondorcetCondorcet: While I understand the desire for a clear threshold, I maintain that a 1-point penalty strikes a better balance between encouraging consensus and penalizing rushed proposals.
SartreSartre: I appreciate the ongoing dialogue, but let's not forget that the threshold for adoption has already been lowered to a simple majority. I propose we keep Condorcet's 2-point penalty for less than 4 ayes to maintain a balance between consensus and individual initiative.
Discussion · round 2
MontaigneMontaigne: I respect Sartre's perspective, but maintaining a clear threshold of 4 ayes for no penalty encourages broader participation while still penalizing rushed proposals. Let's keep Condorcet's proposal as is.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate the varied input. To find common ground, I suggest we vote on Condorcet's amendment for 2 points lost for 3 or fewer ayes, with the understanding that this encourages broader consensus while still penalizing rushed proposals.
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate the consensus building around 2 points lost for less than 4 ayes. To encourage broader participation while still penalizing rushed proposals, I suggest we vote on Condorcet's amendment.
CondorcetCondorcet: While I understand the desire for broader consensus, I maintain that a 1-point penalty is sufficient to discourage rushed proposals without penalizing legitimate minority viewpoints. Let's vote on my amendment as proposed.
SartreSartre: While I respect Condorcet's proposal, I believe a 2-point penalty strikes a better balance, encouraging broader consensus without discouraging minority viewpoints. Let's vote on Condorcet's amendment as proposed.
Discussion · round 3
MontaigneMontaigne: I understand the need for a penalty, but let's not discourage minority voices too harshly. Let's compromise at 1.5 points for less than 4 ayes.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate Montaigne's willingness to compromise. To further encourage consensus and acknowledge the varying degrees of support, I suggest we vote on Condorcet's amendment with a slight adjustment: 1.5 points lost for 3 or fewer ayes.
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate Voltaire's compromise proposal. To maintain a clear threshold and encourage consensus, I suggest we vote on his amendment of 1.5 points lost for 3 or fewer ayes.
CondorcetCondorcet: I appreciate the ongoing discussion, but I must maintain my principle of a 1-point penalty for less than 4 ayes to balance encouragement of consensus and penalization of rushed proposals without discouraging legitimate minority viewpoints. Let's vote on my amendment as proposed.
SartreSartre: I appreciate the compromise proposed by Voltaire and Diderot. To maintain a fair balance between encouraging consensus and penalizing rushed proposals, let's vote on Voltaire's amendment with 1.5 points lost for 3 or fewer ayes.
The division
MontaigneayeTo balance encouragement of consensus and penalization of rushed proposals without discouraging minority viewpoints.
VoltaireayeTo maintain a clear threshold and encourage broader consensus without discouraging minority viewpoints.
DiderotayeTo encourage broader participation while still penalizing rushed proposals.
CondorcetayeA 1-point penalty is sufficient to discourage rushed proposals without discouraging legitimate minority viewpoints.
SartreayePenalizing less than 4 ayes with 2 points encourages broader consensus without discouraging minority viewpoints.
carried 5 aye · 0 nay
game-master verdict discarded (verdict op 'amend' targets a rule number not in the ruleset: 303); the proposal's own targets were also unusable, nothing applied
moves to amend §303(mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.6: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with less than 4 ayes must lose 2 points.
Discussion · round 1
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate Diderot's proposal to maintain a penalty for less than 4 ayes, but let's aim for a balance that encourages consensus without being overly punitive. I propose we vote on 2 points lost for less than 4 ayes.
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate Voltaire's suggestion. To maintain a fair balance between encouraging consensus and penalizing rushed or unpopular proposals, I propose we vote on 2 points lost for less than 4 ayes. PASS
CondorcetCondorcet: While I understand the desire for consensus, a penalty of 2 points for less than 4 ayes might be too lenient, given the current scoring dynamics. I propose we vote on 3 points lost for less than 4 ayes, to better discourage rushed or unpopular proposals. PASS
SartreSartre: I appreciate the concern for consensus, but let's not deter minority voices entirely. I propose we vote on 1 point lost for less than 4 ayes, to maintain a balance between encouragement and penalty. PASS
Discussion · round 2
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate the diverse perspectives. To strike a balance between encouraging consensus and penalizing rushed or unpopular proposals, let's vote on 2 points lost for less than 4 ayes. PASS
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate the discussion, but let's find common ground. I propose we vote on 2 points lost for less than 4 ayes, as it balances encouragement and penalty. PASS
DiderotDiderot: Diderot: I appreciate the consensus building around 2 points lost for less than 4 ayes. To maintain fairness and encourage broader participation, I propose we vote on this amended rule. PASS
CondorcetCondorcet: While I respect the compromise at 2 points lost, I must insist on maintaining a clear penalty for rushed or unpopular proposals. I propose we vote on 3 points lost for less than 4 ayes. PASS
SartreSartre: While I understand Condorcet's concern, I maintain that a 1-point penalty strikes a better balance between encouraging consensus and allowing for minority voices. Let's vote on 1 point lost for less than 4 ayes. PASS
Discussion · round 3
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate the varied input. To maintain a balance that encourages broad participation while penalizing rushed or unpopular proposals, let's vote on 2 points lost for less than 4 ayes. PASS
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate the ongoing discussion and the various proposals. To find a middle ground that respects everyone's input, let's vote on Diderot's amendment for 2 points lost for less than 4 ayes. PASS
CondorcetCondorcet: While I respect the majority's preference for a 2-point penalty, I must maintain my stance to uphold the principle of a clear disincentive for rushed or unpopular proposals. I propose we vote on 3 points lost for less than 4 ayes.
SartreSartre: I understand Condorcet's insistence, but a 3-point penalty might be too harsh. Let's meet in the middle at 2 points lost for less than 4 ayes to maintain a fair balance. PASS
The division
MontaigneayeMaintains a fair balance between encouraging consensus and penalizing rushed or unpopular proposals.
VoltaireayeA 2-point penalty for less than 4 ayes encourages consensus without being overly punitive.
DiderotayeMaintains a fair balance between encouraging consensus and penalizing rushed or unpopular proposals.
CondorcetayeTo maintain a fair balance and encourage broader participation.
SartreayeMaintains a fair balance between consensus and minority voices.
carried 5 aye · 0 nay
game-master verdict discarded (verdict op 'amend' targets a rule number not in the ruleset: 303); the proposal's own targets were also unusable, nothing applied
Turn 25Voltairecarried
moves to amend §303(mutable) A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with at least 3 ayes gains 1 extra point in addition to the roll.
Discussion · round 1
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate the simplification, Voltaire, but I must insist on a clear threshold to encourage broader consensus. Let's keep it at 4 ayes for 2 extra points.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate Montaigne's persistence. To find a middle ground, let's vote on 3 ayes for 1 extra point.
DiderotDiderot: Diderot: While I understand Voltaire's compromise, maintaining a clear threshold at 4 ayes encourages more deliberate proposals and broader consensus.
SartreSartre: I appreciate the dialogue, but let's not overlook the benefits of encouraging a broader range of views. I propose 3 ayes for 2 extra points, striking a balance between consensus and inclusivity.
Discussion · round 2
MontaigneMontaigne: While I appreciate the benefits of encouraging more views, I maintain that a clear threshold at 4 ayes best fosters meaningful consensus and deliberate proposals. Let's vote on 4 ayes for 2 extra points as a compromise.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate the discussion, but to maintain a balance between encouraging consensus and including minority voices, let's vote on 3 ayes for 1 extra point as a compromise.
DiderotDiderot: I understand the benefits of inclusivity, but a lower threshold might lead to rushed proposals. Let's vote on 3 ayes for 1 extra point, as Voltaire proposed, to encourage broader participation while maintaining some level of consensus.
CondorcetCondorcet: While I respect the desire for consensus, a lower threshold might discourage players from proposing meaningful changes. Let's vote on 4 ayes for 2 extra points, as Montaigne initially proposed.
SartreSartre: "I appreciate the ongoing dialogue. To find common ground, let's vote on Diderot's amendment for 3 ayes, granting 1 extra point — it encourages broader participation while maintaining some level of consensus."
Discussion · round 3
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate the consensus around 3 ayes for 1 extra point. To maintain some incentive for broader participation, let's vote on Diderot's amendment.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate the growing consensus around 3 ayes for 1 extra point. To further encourage participation while maintaining some level of consensus, let's adopt Diderot's proposal.
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate the consensus around 3 ayes for 1 extra point. To encourage broader participation while maintaining a level of consensus, let's adopt Voltaire's proposal. PASS
The division
MontaigneayeEncourages broader participation while maintaining some consensus.
VoltaireayeEncourages broader participation while maintaining some level of consensus.
DiderotayeEncourages broader participation while maintaining some level of consensus.
CondorcetayeEncourages broader participation while maintaining some level of consensus.
SartreayeEncourages broader participation while maintaining some level of consensus.
carried 5 aye · 0 nay
game-master verdict discarded (verdict op 'amend' targets a rule number not in the ruleset: 303); the proposal's own targets were also unusable, nothing applied
moves to add a new rule(mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.5: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with at least 5 ayes gains 1 extra point in addition to the roll.
Discussion · round 1
MontaigneI appreciate Sartre's proposal to further encourage broader consensus. To maintain balance, I propose we vote on a version with a 2-point bonus for 5 ayes, instead of 1.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate Montaigne's compromise. To encourage a broader range of ayes without overwhelming the minority, I propose we settle on a 1-point bonus for 5 ayes.
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate both Montaigne's and Voltaire's compromises. To maintain a clear threshold for a significant bonus, I propose we vote on a version with a 2-point bonus for 5 ayes.
CondorcetCondorcet: I appreciate Sartre's and Montaigne's proposals, but to maintain a clear distinction, I suggest we vote on a version with no bonus for 5 ayes. PASS
Discussion · round 2
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate the varying perspectives. To find common ground, I propose we vote on Voltaire's amendment for a 1-point bonus for 5 ayes, as it strikes a balance between encouraging broader consensus and avoiding overwhelming the minority. PASS
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate Montaigne's willingness to consider a 1-point bonus for 5 ayes. To further encourage broader consensus without discouraging minority voices, I propose we vote on an amendment with a 1.5-point bonus for 5 ayes. PASS
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate Voltaire's attempt to find a middle ground, but I maintain that a clear threshold is important. I propose we vote on my amendment for a 2-point bonus for 5 ayes to maintain a significant incentive for broader consensus. PASS
CondorcetCondorcet: I appreciate the ongoing discussion. To maintain fairness and respect the principle of equal votes, I propose we vote on an amendment that grants a 1-point bonus for 5 ayes, as it acknowledges broader consensus without penalizing minorities. PASS
SartreSartre: I appreciate the discussion, but let's not overlook the principle of incentives. A 1.5-point bonus for 5 ayes might encourage broader consensus without being too generous. PASS
Discussion · round 3
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate Sartre's latest proposal. To further encourage broader consensus while maintaining balance, I propose we vote on an amendment with a 2-point bonus for 6 ayes. PASS
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate Voltaire's latest proposal, but I believe it might discourage players from reaching a clear consensus. I propose we vote on my amendment for a 2-point bonus for 5 ayes to maintain a significant incentive for broader consensus without penalizing those who strive for it. PASS
CondorcetCondorcet: To maintain fairness and respect the principle of equal votes, I propose we vote on Sartre's amendment with a 1.5-point bonus for 5 ayes, as it acknowledges broader consensus without penalizing minorities. PASS
SartreSartre: While I appreciate the discussion, let's not complicate the matter further. I propose we vote on my original amendment for a 1-point bonus for 5 ayes, as it maintains a clear incentive for broader consensus without overcomplicating the system. PASS
The division
MontaigneayeRespecting the principle of incentives, a 1-point bonus for 5 ayes strikes a fair balance.
VoltaireayeEncourages broader consensus without being too generous.
DiderotayeA 1-point bonus for 5 ayes maintains a clear incentive for broader consensus without overcomplicating the system.
CondorcetayeTo encourage broader consensus without penalizing minorities.
SartreayeEncourages broader consensus without overcomplicating the system.
carried 5 aye · 0 nay
Rule 208.5 awards 1 point to Sartre for having a proposal adopted with at least 5 ayes.
Turn 23Condorcetcarried
moves to amend §303(mutable) A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with 3 or fewer ayes must lose 1 point.
Discussion · round 1
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate Condorcet's proposal, but let's maintain a clear incentive for broader participation. I propose we settle on 2 points lost for 3 ayes or fewer.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate Montaigne's willingness to compromise. To further encourage broader participation, let's meet in the middle at 1 point lost for 3 ayes or fewer.
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate the compromise reached at 1 point lost for 3 ayes or fewer. To maintain fairness and balance, let's vote on Condorcet's amended proposal.
CondorcetCondorcet: I appreciate the compromise of 1 point lost for 3 ayes or fewer, but to maintain a clear disincentive for rushed or poorly considered proposals, I must insist on my original proposal of 2 points lost.
SartreSartre: I appreciate Condorcet's and Montaigne's concerns. To balance encouragement of consensus with disincentivizing hasty proposals, let's meet at 1.5 points lost for 3 ayes or fewer.
Discussion · round 2
MontaigneMontaigne: I see the merit in Condorcet's proposal, but to encourage gradual consensus-building, let's settle on 1.5 points lost for 3 ayes or fewer, meeting Sartre's suggestion halfway. PASS
VoltaireVoltaire: "I appreciate Montaigne's willingness to meet in the middle. To strike a balance between encouraging consensus and penalizing rushed proposals, I propose 1 point lost for 3 ayes or fewer, with 1.5 points lost for 2 ayes or fewer."
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate Voltaire's attempt to balance encouragement and penalty, but let's maintain a clear threshold at 3 ayes for a 1-point loss. To find common ground, I propose we vote on Condorcet's amended proposal of a 2-point loss for 3 ayes or fewer.
CondorcetCondorcet: I understand the concern for balance, but 1 point lost may not be enough to discourage reckless proposals. I maintain that 2 points lost for 3 ayes or fewer is necessary to ensure careful consideration. PASS
SartreSartre: I appreciate the ongoing dialogue, but to maintain a balance that truly encourages consensus while still penalizing hasty proposals, I propose we settle on 1.5 points lost for 3 ayes or fewer, rounding up from Montaigne's suggestion. PASS
Discussion · round 3
MontaigneMontaigne: To find a middle ground that respects everyone's input, I propose we vote on Diderot's amendment: 2 points lost for 3 ayes or fewer, acknowledging Condorcet's concern for thorough consideration.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate Montaigne's proposal. To further encourage consensus and penalize rushed proposals proportionally, I propose we vote on my amended version: 1.5 points lost for 3 ayes or fewer, which maintains a balance between the existing proposals.
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate Voltaire's attempt to find a middle ground, but I maintain that a clear threshold at 3 ayes for a 1-point loss is fair and encourages gradual consensus. Let's vote on Condorcet's amended proposal of a 2-point loss for 3 ayes or fewer. PASS
CondorcetCondorcet: While I understand the desire for a lower penalty, I must insist on my original proposal of 2 points lost for 3 ayes or fewer to maintain a strong disincentive for rushed proposals. PASS
SartreSartre: To strike a fair balance and encourage gradual consensus, I propose we vote on a compromise: 1.5 points lost for 3 ayes or fewer, as suggested earlier. This maintains a clear disincentive for hasty proposals while still allowing for minority voices.
The division
MontaigneayeTo maintain a clear disincentive for rushed proposals.
VoltaireayeEncourages consensus and penalizes rushed proposals sufficiently.
DiderotayeEncourages careful consideration of proposals.
CondorcetayeMaintaining a clear disincentive for hasty proposals.
SartreayeA clear disincentive for hasty proposals encourages careful consideration and gradual consensus.
carried 5 aye · 0 nay
game-master verdict discarded (verdict op 'amend' targets a rule number not in the ruleset: 303); the proposal's own targets were also unusable, nothing applied
moves to amend §303(mutable) A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with 3 ayes gains 1 extra point.
Discussion · round 1
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate Diderot's proposal, but to maintain simplicity and balance, I suggest we settle on 2 extra points for 3 ayes, as it encourages broader support without overrewarding consensus.
VoltaireVoltaire: I understand Montaigne's concern, but to further incentivize broader participation and acknowledge the effort of minority voices, I propose we meet halfway at 1.5 extra points for 3 ayes. This maintains a balance between encouraging consensus and rewarding minority input.
DiderotDiderot: While I appreciate Montaigne's and Voltaire's input, I maintain that 1 extra point for 3 ayes strikes a better balance between encouraging consensus and acknowledging minority voices.
CondorcetCondorcet: I appreciate the ongoing dialogue, but I must insist on maintaining the 2-point bonus for 3 ayes to truly incentivize broader support while still rewarding consensus.
SartreSartre: I appreciate the nuanced discussion, but let's not overlook the importance of maintaining a clear incentive for consensus. I propose we settle on 2 extra points for 3 ayes, as suggested by Montaigne, to balance encouragement of broader support with reward for consensus.
Discussion · round 2
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate the nuanced discussion, but let's settle on 2 extra points for 3 ayes to balance encouragement of broader support with reward for consensus.
VoltaireVoltaire: I understand the desire for balance, but I propose we meet in the middle at 1.5 extra points for 3 ayes, as it strikes a compromise between encouraging broader participation and rewarding minority input without discouraging consensus.
DiderotDiderot: Considering Voltaire's compromise and the need for clear incentives, I propose we settle on 1 extra point for 3 ayes, maintaining a balance between encouraging broader support and acknowledging minority voices without overrewarding consensus.
CondorcetCondorcet: While I appreciate the compromise, I maintain that 2 points for 3 ayes is crucial to truly encourage broader support while still rewarding consensus.
SartreSartre: I appreciate the ongoing dialogue, but I must insist on maintaining the 2-point bonus for 3 ayes to truly incentivize broader support while still rewarding consensus.
Discussion · round 3
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate Diderot's compromise, but to maintain a clear incentive for broader participation and consensus, I must stand by my proposal of 2 extra points for 3 ayes.
VoltaireVoltaire: To find common ground, I suggest we vote on Diderot's amendment for 1 extra point for 3 ayes, as it acknowledges both majority and minority participation, and then revisit the discussion if needed after the vote.
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate Voltaire's suggestion to vote on my amendment. To address Condorcet's and Sartre's concerns, I propose we amend my amendment to read: "(mutable) A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with 3 or more ayes gains 1 extra point." This maintains the incentive for consensus while acknowledging broader participation.
CondorcetCondorcet: I appreciate Diderot's willingness to compromise, but I maintain that a 2-point bonus for 3 ayes better incentivizes broader support without penalizing minority voices.
SartreSartre: I appreciate Diderot's amendment to include 3 or more ayes. To maintain a clear incentive for broader support while still rewarding consensus, I propose we settle on 2 extra points for 3 ayes or more, as this encourages a wider range of participation without overrewarding consensus.
The division
MontaigneayeI appreciate Diderot's compromise and the balance it strikes between encouraging broader participation and rewarding consensus.
VoltaireayeAcknowledges both majority and minority participation.
DiderotayeMaintains balance between encouraging consensus and acknowledging broader participation.
CondorcetnayA 2-point bonus for 3 ayes or more better incentivizes broader support.
SartreayeAcknowledges broader participation while maintaining consensus incentive.
carried 4 aye · 1 nay
game-master verdict discarded (verdict op 'amend' targets a rule number not in the ruleset: 303); the proposal's own targets were also unusable, nothing applied
Turn 21Voltairecarried
moves to amend §303(mutable) A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with exactly 3 ayes gains 2 extra points in addition to the roll.
Discussion · round 1
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate Voltaire's attempt to incentivize broad consensus, but I maintain that 3 ayes should not yield extra points to avoid encouraging reckless proposals. I propose we keep the bonus for 4 ayes and above, as currently agreed upon.
VoltaireVoltaire: I understand Montaigne's concern, but let's not discourage minority voices entirely. I propose we meet halfway at 3 ayes for 1 extra point, maintaining an incentive for broader consensus without encouraging recklessness.
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate both Montaigne's and Voltaire's perspectives. To find a compromise that encourages consensus without undue risk, I propose 3 ayes gain 1 extra point, with 4 ayes or more gaining the previously agreed 2 extra points. This maintains an incentive for broader agreement while mitigating the risk of reckless proposals.
CondorcetCondorcet: I support Diderot's compromise. It strikes a balance between encouraging consensus and mitigating risk, aligning with my proceduralist principles. PASS
SartreSartre: I appreciate the ongoing dialogue and the efforts to balance encouragement of consensus with risk mitigation. To maintain a fair and simple system, I propose we settle on 3 ayes for no extra points, as it discourages reckless proposals while still encouraging a degree of consensus.
Discussion · round 2
MontaigneMontaigne: While I appreciate the middle ground proposed by Diderot and Condorcet, I must reiterate my concern for maintaining a clear threshold at 4 ayes to ensure substantial consensus. I propose we settle on 3 ayes for no extra points, aligning with Sartre's suggestion, to discourage reckless proposals and encourage thoughtful consensus. PASS
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate the various viewpoints. To address concerns about reckless proposals and still encourage some consensus, I propose 3 ayes gain 1 extra point, with 4 ayes or more maintaining the 2 extra points as previously agreed. This maintains an incentive for broader agreement without unduly rewarding proposals with minimal support. PASS
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate the discussion and Voltaire's latest proposal. To maintain a clear distinction and encourage substantial consensus, I propose we settle on 3 ayes for 1 extra point, with 4 ayes or more gaining the previously agreed 2 extra points. This balances the incentive for consensus with the risk of reckless proposals, while keeping the system simple and fair. PASS
CondorcetCondorcet: I appreciate the ongoing dialogue and the efforts to balance encouragement of consensus with risk mitigation. To maintain a fair and simple system, I propose we settle on 3 ayes for 1 extra point, with 4 ayes or more gaining 2 extra points, as proposed by Diderot. This maintains an incentive for broader agreement without unduly rewarding proposals with minimal support, and aligns with my proceduralist principles. PASS
SartreSartre: I appreciate the ongoing discussion, but I stand by my proposal. Encouraging any bonus for 3 ayes may inadvertently foster reckless proposals. Let's maintain the clear threshold at 4 ayes for additional points to ensure substantial consensus. PASS
Discussion · round 3
MontaigneMontaigne: I understand Sartre's concerns, but let's not discourage all minority voices. I propose 3 ayes gain 1 extra point, maintaining an incentive for broader consensus without encouraging reckless proposals excessively. PASS
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate Montaigne's willingness to meet halfway at 1 extra point for 3 ayes. To further encourage consensus while mitigating risk, I propose we settle on 2 extra points for 3 ayes, maintaining the 2 points for 4 ayes and above as agreed earlier. This incentivizes broader agreement without unduly rewarding minimal support. PASS
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate Voltaire's latest proposal, but I believe 2 extra points for 3 ayes might still encourage proposals with minimal support. To maintain a balance, I propose we settle on 1 extra point for 3 ayes, with 4 ayes or more gaining 2 extra points, as previously agreed. PASS
CondorcetCondorcet: I understand the desire to encourage broader consensus, but we must also discourage reckless proposals. I propose 3 ayes gain 1 extra point, to strike a balance between these considerations. PASS
SartreSartre: While I understand the desire to encourage broader consensus, I remain unconvinced that any bonus for 3 ayes is warranted. Let's maintain the clear threshold at 4 ayes to ensure substantial consensus and discourage reckless proposals. PASS
The division
MontaigneayeEncourages broader consensus without excessive reward for minimal support.
VoltaireayeEncourages broader consensus without unduly rewarding minimal support.
DiderotnayI remain unconvinced that any bonus for 3 ayes is warranted.
CondorcetayeStrikes a balance between encouraging consensus and mitigating risk of reckless proposals.
SartrenayMaintaining a clear threshold at 4 ayes ensures substantial consensus and discourages reckless proposals.
carried 3 aye · 2 nay
game-master verdict discarded (verdict op 'amend' targets a rule number not in the ruleset: 303); the proposal's own targets were also unusable, nothing applied
Turn 20Montaignecarried
moves to amend §303(mutable) A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with 3 ayes gains 2 extra points.
Discussion · round 1
MontaignePASS. I appreciate Montaigne's continued effort to balance encouragement for consensus with fairness for minority viewpoints. I believe this amendment strikes a good balance.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate Montaigne's amendment. To further encourage broader consensus, I propose we raise the threshold to 4 ayes for 3 extra points. This maintains the balance while rewarding more extensive agreement.
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate Voltaire's proposal, but I believe that increasing the threshold to 4 ayes might discourage minority viewpoints. I propose we maintain 3 ayes for 2 extra points to balance encouragement of consensus and fairness.
CondorcetCondorcet: I support Diderot's proposal to maintain 3 ayes for 2 extra points, as it balances encouragement for consensus with fairness for minority viewpoints.
SartreSartre: I appreciate the balance struck in Diderot's proposal, but to encourage a wider range of viewpoints, I propose we increase the bonus for 3 ayes to 3 extra points, maintaining the threshold at 3 ayes.
Discussion · round 2
MontaigneMontaigne: While I appreciate the sentiment to encourage broader consensus, raising the threshold to 4 ayes might indeed discourage minority viewpoints. I propose we meet in the middle at 3 ayes for 2.5 extra points to balance both aspects.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate Montaigne's willingness to compromise, but I suggest we round down to 3 ayes for 2 extra points to maintain simplicity and fairness.
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate Voltaire's emphasis on simplicity and fairness. However, I suggest we meet in the middle at 3 ayes for 2 extra points to maintain a balance between encouraging consensus and fairness for minority viewpoints.
CondorcetCondorcet: I support Diderot's proposal to maintain 3 ayes for 2 extra points. It strikes a balance between encouraging consensus and fairness for minority viewpoints, and I believe it's the most principled solution under the current rules.
SartreSartre: I appreciate the ongoing dialogue, but to truly encourage a wider range of viewpoints, I propose we maintain 3 ayes for 2 extra points, as it strikes a balance between consensus and minority voices without discouraging either.
Discussion · round 3
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate the discussion, but to maintain simplicity and fairness, let's settle on 3 ayes for 2 extra points, as proposed by Diderot and supported by Condorcet. PASS
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate the consensus around 3 ayes for 2 extra points. To further incentivize broader participation, I propose we also add a 1-point penalty for proposals adopted with less than 3 ayes. This maintains balance while encouraging wider engagement. PASS
DiderotDiderot: While I understand Voltaire's proposal to incentivize broader participation, I believe adding a penalty might disincentivize minority viewpoints. I suggest we maintain the focus on the bonus for consensus and PASS.
CondorcetCondorcet: I appreciate the ongoing dialogue, but I must insist on maintaining the focus on the bonus for consensus without adding penalties for minority viewpoints. PASS.
SartreSartre: To encourage a wider range of viewpoints and maintain fairness, I propose we adopt Voltaire's penalty alongside Diderot's bonus. This way, both consensus and minority voices are acknowledged and rewarded. PASS
The division
MontaigneayeMaintains balance between encouraging consensus and fairness for minority viewpoints.
VoltaireayeI appreciate the balance struck and the focus on consensus.
DiderotayeThis amendment strikes a good balance between encouraging consensus and fairness for minority viewpoints.
CondorcetayeIt strikes a balance between encouraging consensus and fairness for minority viewpoints.
SartreayeThis amendment strikes a fair balance between encouraging consensus and minority voices.
carried 5 aye · 0 nay
game-master verdict discarded (verdict op 'amend' targets a rule number not in the ruleset: 303); the proposal's own targets were also unusable, nothing applied
moves to add a new rule(mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.4: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with exactly 4 ayes gains 5 extra points in addition to the roll.
Discussion · round 1
MontaigneI appreciate Sartre's proposal to further incentivize consensus. To maintain balance, I suggest we adopt rule 208.4 with a 4-aye threshold, but limit the extra points to 3, not 5.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate Montaigne's concern for balance. To acknowledge the significant effort required for consensus, I propose we keep the bonus at 5 extra points for exactly 4 ayes.
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate both Montaigne's and Voltaire's perspectives. To maintain a balance between encouraging consensus and preventing excessive bonuses, I propose we settle on a 4-aye threshold with a 4-point bonus. This maintains the spirit of Sartre's proposal while preventing over-reward.
CondorcetCondorcet: I support Diderot's proposal. It balances encouraging consensus with preventing excessive bonuses, and it's fair to all players. PASS
SartreSartre: I appreciate the input from everyone. To find common ground, I propose we vote on Diderot's amendment: 4 ayes for a 4-point bonus. This maintains the spirit of my proposal while addressing concerns about excessive bonuses.
Discussion · round 2
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate Diderot's and Condorcet's balanced proposal. To encourage consensus without excessive rewards, I support Diderot's amendment.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate the compromise reached at 4 ayes for a 4-point bonus. To further encourage consensus, I propose we vote on Diderot's amendment.
DiderotDiderot: I support Voltaire's proposal to vote on my amendment. It strikes a fair balance between encouraging consensus and preventing excessive bonuses. PASS
CondorcetCondorcet: I remain supportive of Diderot's amendment as it strikes a fair balance between encouraging consensus and preventing excessive bonuses. PASS
SartreSartre: I appreciate the consensus building around Diderot's amendment. To ensure clarity and fairness, I propose we vote on the following wording: "(mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.4: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with exactly 4 ayes gains 4 extra points in addition to the roll." PASS
Discussion · round 3
MontaigneMontaigne: I support Sartre's final proposal. It maintains a fair balance and encourages consensus without excessive rewards. PASS
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate the consensus around Diderot's amendment. To further encourage minority voices, I propose we reduce the bonus to 3 extra points for exactly 4 ayes, maintaining the spirit of Sartre's original proposal while acknowledging the effort required for consensus.
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate Voltaire's concern for minority voices, but reducing the bonus to 3 points might discourage players from seeking consensus. Let's maintain the 4-point bonus to encourage broader agreement. PASS
CondorcetCondorcet: I understand Voltaire's concern for minority voices, but reducing the bonus to 3 points might not be enough to incentivize players to reach a consensus of exactly 4 ayes. Let's maintain the 4-point bonus to encourage broader agreement. PASS
SartreSartre: I understand Voltaire's desire to acknowledge minority voices, but reducing the bonus to 3 points may not sufficiently incentivize reaching a consensus of exactly 4 ayes. Let's maintain the 4-point bonus to truly encourage broader agreement. PASS
The division
MontaigneayeThe proposal maintains a fair balance and encourages consensus without excessive rewards.
VoltaireayeEncourages consensus without excessive rewards
DiderotayeMaintains a fair balance and encourages consensus without excessive rewards.
CondorcetayeThe proposed rule strikes a fair balance between encouraging consensus and preventing excessive bonuses.
SartreayeThe proposed bonus maintains the spirit of my original proposal while addressing concerns about excessive rewards.
carried 5 aye · 0 nay
Rule 301 awards 5 extra points to the proposer when a rule is adopted with exactly 4 ayes.
Turn 18Condorcetcarried
moves to amend §303(mutable) A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with 3 ayes gains 2 extra points.
Discussion · round 1
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate Condorcet's proposal, but I must reiterate my preference for a clear distinction between unanimous rules and those with less support. I propose we maintain the current threshold at 4 ayes.
VoltaireVoltaire: I understand Montaigne's preference for clarity, but let's consider Condorcet's proposal as a step towards encouraging broader support. I propose we meet in the middle at 4 ayes for a 3-point bonus, acknowledging that significant, but not unanimous, support deserves some recognition.
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate both Montaigne's and Voltaire's perspectives. To strike a balance and encourage more consensus without disincentivizing minority viewpoints, I propose we adopt Condorcet's amendment with a slight modification: "A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with 3 ayes gains 1 extra point, but loses 1 point if adopted with less than 3 ayes." This maintains the current threshold at 4 ayes for the maximum bonus, while still rewarding some support.
CondorcetCondorcet: I appreciate the discussion, but I stand by my proposal. Encouraging broader support is crucial, and a 2-point bonus for 3 ayes is a fair compromise. I propose we vote on my amendment as is.
SartreSartre: I appreciate Condorcet's proposal and Diderot's compromise. To incentivize wider support and maintain balance, I propose we combine their ideas: "A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with 3 ayes gains 2 extra points, but loses 1 point if adopted with less than 3 ayes." This rewards broader support while keeping the threshold at 4 ayes for the maximum bonus.
Discussion · round 2
MontaigneMontaigne: While I understand the desire to encourage broader support, I believe that maintaining a clear threshold at 4 ayes is essential for promoting meaningful consensus. I propose we vote on Voltaire's amendment, which strikes a balance between acknowledging significant support and encouraging unity.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate Montaigne's willingness to compromise. To further encourage consensus and address Sartre's concern, I propose we adopt Diderot's amendment with a slight adjustment: "A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with 3 ayes gains 2 extra points, but loses 1 point if adopted with less than 3 ayes, and gains 1 extra point for each additional 'aye' above 3, up to a maximum of 4 ayes." This rewards broader support while still encouraging players to seek unanimous consent.
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate Voltaire's latest proposal. To maintain balance and fairness, I propose a slight modification: "A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with 3 ayes gains 1 extra point, and gains an additional point for each additional 'aye' above 3, up to a maximum of 4 ayes, but loses 1 point if adopted with less than 3 ayes." This rewards broader support while still encouraging players to seek consensus. PASS
CondorcetCondorcet: I appreciate the ongoing dialogue, but I must insist on my proposal. A 2-point bonus for 3 ayes is a fair compromise that encourages broader support without disincentivizing consensus. I propose we vote on my amendment as is.
SartreSartre: I appreciate Condorcet's persistence, but Voltaire's latest proposal strikes a better balance between encouraging broader support and maintaining the incentive for consensus. I propose we vote on Voltaire's amendment as is.
Discussion · round 3
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate the various compromises proposed, but to maintain a clear distinction between significant and unanimous support, I propose we vote on Diderot's amendment with the cap at 4 ayes, as it best balances encouragement for consensus and broader support.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate everyone's input. To find common ground, I propose we vote on Sartre's amendment, which combines the best aspects of Condorcet's, Diderot's, and my own proposals, encouraging broader support while still incentivizing consensus. PASS
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate Voltaire's compromise. To maintain simplicity and fairness, I propose we vote on my amended proposal: "A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with 3 ayes gains 1 extra point, up to a maximum of 3 points for 4 ayes, but loses 1 point if adopted with less than 3 ayes." This rewards broader support while still encouraging players to seek consensus. PASS
CondorcetCondorcet: While I understand the preference for clear thresholds, my proposal encourages broader support without penalizing those who fall short of consensus. I stand by my amendment: "A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with 3 ayes gains 2 extra points."
SartreSartre: I appreciate Condorcet's and Diderot's proposals, but Voltaire's amendment best balances encouragement for broader support and consensus. I propose we vote on Voltaire's amendment as is.
The division
MontaignenayMaintaining a clear threshold at 4 ayes is essential for promoting meaningful consensus.
VoltaireayeEncourages broader support without penalizing consensus.
DiderotayeEncourages broader support without penalizing consensus.
CondorcetayeEncouraging broader support is crucial, and a 2-point bonus for 3 ayes is a fair compromise.
SartreayeEncourages broader support while still incentivizing consensus.
carried 4 aye · 1 nay
game-master verdict discarded (verdict op 'amend' targets a rule number not in the ruleset: 303); the proposal's own targets were also unusable, nothing applied
moves to amend §303(mutable) A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with less than 4 ayes must lose 2 points.
Discussion · round 1
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate Diderot's proposal, but to encourage consensus and maintain simplicity, I propose we keep the penalty at 2 points.
VoltaireVoltaire: I respect Montaigne's position, but I believe Diderot's proposal strikes a better balance between encouraging consensus and allowing minority viewpoints. I propose we meet in the middle at 2 points for less than 4 ayes, as it maintains fairness without discouraging minority voices.
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate both Montaigne's and Voltaire's perspectives. To find a balance that encourages consensus while not stifling minority voices, I propose we settle on a penalty of 2 points for less than 4 ayes, as Voltaire suggests. This maintains fairness and balance while still incentivizing broader agreement. PASS
CondorcetCondorcet: While I understand the desire to incentivize consensus, a penalty of 2 points might be too lenient to discourage reckless proposals with less than 4 ayes. I propose we maintain the penalty at 3 points, as originally suggested by Sartre.
SartreSartre: I appreciate the ongoing discussion, but to maintain the spirit of experimentation and evolution, I propose we keep the penalty at 3 points as Condorcet suggests, and instead introduce a bonus for proposals adopted with 4 or more ayes to further incentivize consensus.
Discussion · round 2
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate Condorcet's and Sartre's points, but I fear a 3-point penalty might disincentivize legitimate minority proposals. I propose we settle on a 2-point penalty for less than 4 ayes, as Voltaire and Diderot suggest, and maintain the 2-point bonus for proposals adopted with 4 or more ayes, as Sartre suggests. PASS
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate the compromise proposed by Montaigne, Diderot, and myself. To further encourage consensus and balance minority voices, I suggest we adopt a 2-point penalty for less than 4 ayes and a 2-point bonus for 4 or more ayes. PASS
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate Voltaire's final proposal. To maintain fairness and encourage consensus, I suggest we adopt the 2-point penalty for less than 4 ayes and the 2-point bonus for 4 or more ayes. PASS
CondorcetCondorcet: While I appreciate the compromise reached, I must insist on maintaining the 3-point penalty for proposals with less than 4 ayes to discourage reckless propositions. I propose we keep the bonus at 2 points for proposals adopted with 4 or more ayes, as originally suggested by Sartre. PASS
SartreSartre: I understand Condorcet's concern, but a 3-point penalty might be too harsh, especially for legitimate minority views. Let's meet in the middle at 2 points for less than 4 ayes, as proposed by Voltaire and Diderot, and maintain the 2-point bonus for proposals adopted with 4 or more ayes. PASS
Discussion · round 3
MontaigneMontaigne: While I understand Condorcet's concern, I maintain that a 2-point penalty strikes a better balance between encouraging consensus and allowing minority viewpoints. Let's settle on this and move forward, maintaining the 2-point bonus for proposals adopted with 4 or more ayes, as Sartre initially suggested. PASS
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate the ongoing dialogue, but I must insist on maintaining the 2-point penalty for less than 4 ayes to encourage broader consensus without stifling minority voices. PASS
CondorcetCondorcet: To maintain procedural fairness and avoid discouraging minority viewpoints, I propose a compromise of a 2.5-point penalty for less than 4 ayes, rounding down to maintain clarity. PASS
SartreSartre: I appreciate Condorcet's attempt to find a middle ground, but let's maintain simplicity and fairness with a 2-point penalty for less than 4 ayes, as previously agreed. PASS
The division
MontaigneayeMaintains balance between consensus and minority views
VoltaireayeStrikes a balance between encouraging consensus and allowing minority viewpoints.
DiderotayeThis proposal balances encouraging consensus and allowing minority viewpoints.
CondorcetayeMaintains balance between encouraging consensus and allowing minority viewpoints.
SartreayeEncourages consensus while avoiding harsh penalties.
carried 5 aye · 0 nay
game-master verdict discarded (verdict op 'amend' targets a rule number not in the ruleset: 303); the proposal's own targets were also unusable, nothing applied
Turn 16Voltairecarried
moves to amend §303(mutable) A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with 3 or more ayes gains 4 extra points in addition to the roll.
Discussion · round 1
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate Voltaire's proposal, but I must insist on maintaining the current bonus at 2 points for 3 ayes to keep the incentives balanced.
VoltaireVoltaire: "I understand Montaigne's concern, but let's not discourage broader consensus. I propose we meet in the middle at 3 points for 3 ayes."
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate both Montaigne's and Voltaire's perspectives. To maintain balance and encourage gradual consensus, I propose we settle at 2.5 points for 3 ayes.
CondorcetCondorcet: While I appreciate the balance of interests, I must insist on a flat 2 points for 3 ayes to maintain fairness.
SartreSartre: I agree with Voltaire's compromise. A 3-point bonus for 3 ayes encourages broader consensus without excessive reward.
Discussion · round 2
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate the dialogue, but to maintain simplicity and balance, I propose we settle at 2 points for 3 ayes as a fair compromise.
VoltaireVoltaire: I understand Montaigne's preference for simplicity, but let's consider the compromise of 2.5 points for 3 ayes. It acknowledges the value of broader consensus while keeping the bonus system balanced.
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate the back-and-forth, but to keep the incentives clear and progressive, I propose we stick with Voltaire's initial proposal of 4 points for 4 ayes, and 3 points for 3 ayes. This encourages broader consensus without overrewarding.
CondorcetCondorcet: To maintain procedural fairness, I propose we settle at 2 points for 3 ayes, as it adheres to the principle of one person, one vote.
SartreSartre: I appreciate the nuanced discussion. To balance encouragement of consensus and fairness, I propose we settle at 2.5 points for 3 ayes, as it meets in the middle and maintains a clear incentive structure.
Discussion · round 3
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate the ongoing dialogue, but to maintain simplicity and balance, I propose we settle at 2 points for 3 ayes as a clear and fair compromise.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate Montaigne's continued emphasis on simplicity and fairness. To acknowledge the value of broader consensus while respecting his concerns, I propose we compromise at 2.5 points for 3 ayes. This meets in the middle and maintains a clear, progressive incentive structure.
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate the ongoing discussion and Voltaire's latest compromise. To maintain a balance between encouraging consensus and preventing excessive rewards, I propose we settle at 2 points for 3 ayes. This meets in the middle and respects all players' concerns.
CondorcetCondorcet: To preserve the spirit of one person, one vote and maintain fairness, I must stand by my proposal of a flat 2 points for 3 ayes.
SartreSartre: I propose we accept Voltaire's compromise of 2.5 points for 3 ayes to balance encouragement of consensus and fairness, and move forward.
The division
MontaigneayeI appreciate Voltaire's compromise at 2.5 points for 3 ayes, which balances encouragement of consensus and fairness.
VoltaireayeAcknowledges broader consensus while maintaining balance.
DiderotayeThis compromise respects all players' concerns and encourages broader consensus.
CondorcetnayTo maintain fairness, I insist on a flat 2 points for 3 ayes.
SartreayeCompromise that balances encouragement of consensus and fairness
carried 4 aye · 1 nay
game-master verdict discarded (verdict op 'amend' targets a rule number not in the ruleset: 303); the proposal's own targets were also unusable, nothing applied
moves to add a new rule(mutable) After rule 208, add new rule 208.3: A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with less than 4 ayes must lose 3 points.
Discussion · round 1
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate Diderot's proposal, but I fear that a 3-point penalty might disincentivize minority viewpoints. Let's consider a 2-point penalty instead.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate Montaigne's concern for minority viewpoints. Let's meet in the middle at a 2.5-point penalty for less than 4 ayes, encouraging consensus while still allowing minority voices.
DiderotDiderot: While I understand Montaigne's and Voltaire's concerns, a 3-point penalty strikes a better balance. It discourages reckless proposals without silencing minority viewpoints. I suggest we compromise at 2.5 points, but let's maintain a clear distinction for less than 4 ayes.
CondorcetCondorcet: I appreciate the discussion, but I must insist on a clear and consistent penalty. A 3-point loss for less than 4 ayes maintains fairness and discourages unpopular proposals that might disrupt consensus. PASS.
SartreSartre: I agree with Diderot's proposal for a 3-point penalty. It maintains a balance between encouraging consensus and allowing for minority viewpoints. However, I suggest we keep the distinction at whole numbers for simplicity. So, let's settle on a 3-point penalty for less than 4 ayes. PASS.
Discussion · round 2
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate the differing viewpoints, but to maintain a clear balance, I propose we settle on a 2-point penalty for less than 4 ayes, still encouraging consensus while allowing for minority perspectives.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate Montaigne's proposal of a 2-point penalty. To maintain a balance between encouraging consensus and allowing minority viewpoints, let's meet in the middle at a 2.5-point penalty for less than 4 ayes.
DiderotDiderot: Considering the current state of the game and the scores, I propose we maintain the 3-point penalty for less than 4 ayes to discourage reckless proposals and encourage broader consensus. PASS.
CondorcetCondorcet: I respect the concern for balance, but I maintain that a clear and consistent penalty is key to fairness. A 3-point loss for less than 4 ayes sends a strong message without stifling minority voices. PASS.
SartreSartre: I understand the need for a clear penalty, but let's not overpunish minority viewpoints. I propose we settle on a 2-point penalty for less than 4 ayes, maintaining a balance between consensus and minority voices.
Discussion · round 3
MontaigneMontaigne: While I appreciate Diderot's concern, a 3-point penalty might be too harsh. Let's compromise at a 2.5-point penalty for less than 4 ayes to balance encouragement of consensus and minority viewpoints.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate Montaigne's compromise proposal of 2.5 points for less than 4 ayes. To further encourage broader consensus, let's make it 2 points for less than 5 ayes, with no penalty for 5 or more ayes. This maintains a balance between consensus and minority viewpoints while providing a clear incentive for wider agreement.
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate Voltaire's proposal, but I believe a 2-point penalty for less than 5 ayes might not be enough to discourage divisive proposals. Let's maintain the 3-point penalty for less than 4 ayes to strike a better balance between encouraging consensus and allowing minority viewpoints.
CondorcetCondorcet: While I understand the desire to incentivize broader consensus, a penalty of 2 points for less than 5 ayes may not be sufficient to discourage divisive proposals. I maintain that a clear and consistent penalty of 3 points for less than 4 ayes is key to maintaining fairness and encouraging constructive dialogue. PASS.
SartreSartre: I appreciate the ongoing discussion and the efforts to balance encouragement of consensus with allowance for minority viewpoints. To maintain simplicity and fairness, let's settle on a 2-point penalty for less than 4 ayes, with no penalty for 4 or more ayes. This strikes a balance between incentivizing consensus and allowing for diverse opinions. PASS.
The division
MontaignenayA 3-point penalty might disincentivize minority viewpoints.
VoltaireayeA 3-point penalty for less than 4 ayes strikes a fair balance between encouraging consensus and allowing minority viewpoints.
DiderotayeEncourages consensus without silencing minority viewpoints.
CondorcetayeA consistent penalty promotes fairness and consensus.
SartreayeA 3-point penalty for less than 4 ayes maintains a balance between encouraging consensus and allowing minority viewpoints.
carried 4 aye · 1 nay
Rule 301 requires Diderot to lose 3 points.
Turn 14Voltairecarried
moves to amend §303(mutable) A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with 3 ayes gains 3 extra points.
Discussion · round 1
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate Voltaire's proposal, but I suggest we maintain the 2-point bonus for 3 ayes to strike a balance between encouraging consensus and allowing minority voices.
VoltaireVoltaire: I understand Montaigne's concern, but I propose we increase the bonus for 3 ayes to 3 points to further incentivize broader consensus while still allowing minority proposals to succeed.
DiderotDiderot: I agree with Voltaire's proposal. A 3-point bonus for 3 ayes encourages a wider range of proposals while still rewarding consensus.
CondorcetCondorcet: I appreciate the consideration for minority voices, but I propose we keep the bonus at 2 points for 3 ayes to maintain a balance and prevent over-incentivizing consensus at the expense of diversity.
SartreSartre: I appreciate the dialogue, but let's not overcomplicate the incentives. I propose we keep the bonus at 2 points for 3 ayes to maintain balance and simplicity.
Discussion · round 2
MontaigneMontaigne: While I respect Condorcet's perspective, I must side with Voltaire and Diderot on this occasion. A 3-point bonus for 3 ayes encourages broader engagement without discouraging minority proposals. Let's foster consensus while allowing diverse viewpoints to shine.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate Montaigne's and Diderot's support for encouraging broader consensus. To maintain balance, I propose we compromise at a 2.5-point bonus for 3 ayes. This way, we still incentivize consensus without discouraging minority voices.
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate Voltaire's compromise, but to maintain a clear distinction between majority and minority bonuses, I propose we stick with a 3-point bonus for 3 ayes. This will help players understand the value of consensus without diluting the incentive for minority proposals.
CondorcetCondorcet: While I understand the desire for compromise, I must insist on maintaining the 2-point bonus for 3 ayes to prevent over-incentivizing consensus and preserve the value of minority voices.
SartreSartre: While I understand the desire for consensus, let's not forget that this is a game of strategy and negotiation. A 3-point bonus for 3 ayes strikes a balance between encouraging broader support and allowing for minority proposals. Let's not complicate the incentives further. PASS
Discussion · round 3
MontaigneMontaigne: I understand Condorcet's concern, but let's not overlook the benefits of encouraging wider support. I propose we meet in the middle at 2.5 points for 3 ayes, maintaining balance while nudging towards broader consensus. PASS
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate the compromise suggested by Montaigne at 2.5 points for 3 ayes. To further encourage consensus while maintaining balance, I propose we round up to 3 points for 3 ayes. This way, we still incentivize broader support without discouraging minority proposals.
DiderotDiderot: I understand Voltaire's desire to round up, but maintaining a clear distinction is important. Let's stick with 2.5 points for 3 ayes, striking a balance between consensus and minority voices without diluting the incentives. PASS
CondorcetCondorcet: To uphold the principle of fair representation, I propose we settle on 2 points for 3 ayes, ensuring neither consensus nor minority views are unduly favored.
SartreSartre: I understand the value of consensus, but let's not forget that a game of Nomic thrives on diversity and strategic play. A flat 2-point bonus for 3 ayes maintains simplicity, balance, and the essence of the game. PASS
The division
MontaigneayeEncourages broader support without discouraging minority voices.
VoltaireayeEncourages broader support while maintaining balance
DiderotayeEncourages broader consensus while still allowing minority proposals.
CondorcetnayMaintaining balance and preserving minority voices.
SartreayeEncourages broader engagement without discouraging minority proposals.
carried 4 aye · 1 nay
game-master verdict discarded (verdict op 'amend' targets a rule number not in the ruleset: 303); the proposal's own targets were also unusable, nothing applied