The motion
To amend §303
(mutable) A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with 3 or fewer ayes loses 2 points.To maintain balance and encourage some level of consensus.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
MontaigneMontaigne: I propose this amendment to strike a balance between encouraging consensus and allowing for minority viewpoints. Keeping the penalty at 2 points maintains a fair incentive for broader agreement while still permitting dissension.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate Montaigne's attempt at balance, but let's further incentivize consensus. I propose we amend [303] to "(mutable) A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with 3 or fewer ayes loses 3 points."
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate both of your perspectives. To balance encouragement of consensus and minority viewpoints, I propose we settle on a penalty of 2 points for rules adopted with 3 or fewer ayes, as it is a fair compromise between your proposals.
CondorcetCondorcet: I appreciate the ongoing efforts to balance consensus and minority viewpoints. I propose a compromise of 2 points penalty for rules adopted with 3 or fewer ayes, with a 1-point bonus for those adopted with 4 or more, as it maintains balance and encourages broad agreement without discouraging minority voices.
SartreSartre: I appreciate the focus on balance, but let's not overcomplicate the system. I propose we keep the penalty at 2 points for rules adopted with 3 or fewer ayes, as it strikes a fair balance between encouraging consensus and allowing for minority viewpoints without excessive penalties.
Discussion · round 2
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate the variety of proposals, but to maintain simplicity and balance, I suggest we settle on Diderot's proposal of a 2-point penalty for rules adopted with 3 or fewer ayes. This keeps the penalty fair while still encouraging broader agreement. PASS
VoltaireVoltaire: While I understand the desire to keep penalties minimal, I propose a slight increase to 3 points for rules adopted with 3 or fewer ayes. This further encourages unanimous agreement while still permitting dissent.
DiderotDiderot: I respect Voltaire's proposal, but I fear a 3-point penalty might deter legitimate minority proposals. I suggest we meet in the middle at 2 points, encouraging consensus without discouraging valid dissent. PASS
CondorcetCondorcet: I appreciate the concern for balance, but let's not disincentivize minority viewpoints too harshly. I propose a 2-point penalty for rules adopted with 3 or fewer ayes, with a 2-point bonus for those adopted with 4 or more, as it maintains balance and encourages broad agreement without excessive penalties. PASS
SartreSartre: I appreciate the ongoing discussion, but let's not convolute the system with bonuses. I propose we keep it simple: a 2-point penalty for rules adopted with 3 or fewer ayes, as it maintains a fair balance between consensus and minority viewpoints without unnecessary complexity.
Discussion · round 3
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate the varied input, but let's not make the penalty too harsh. I propose we settle on Diderot's proposal of a 2-point penalty for rules adopted with 3 or fewer ayes, maintaining a fair balance between consensus and minority voices. PASS
VoltaireVoltaire: I respect Diderot's proposal, but I worry that a 2-point penalty might not be enough to discourage reckless proposals. Let's meet in the middle at a 2-point penalty for rules adopted with 3 or fewer ayes, and a 1-point bonus for those adopted with 4 or more, encouraging broad agreement without excessive deterrents.
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate Voltaire's compromise, but let's not introduce a bonus system that could encourage strategic voting. I propose we maintain the penalty at 2 points for rules adopted with 3 or fewer ayes, without additional bonuses.
CondorcetCondorcet: In the spirit of compromise, I propose we settle on Voltaire's latest suggestion: a 2-point penalty for rules adopted with 3 or fewer ayes and a 1-point bonus for those adopted with 4 or more. This maintains balance while encouraging broad agreement without excessive deterrents or unnecessary complexity. PASS
SartreSartre: While I understand the desire for compromise, let's not introduce bonuses that could complicate the system. I propose we keep it simple: a 2-point penalty for rules adopted with 3 or fewer ayes, as it maintains a fair balance between consensus and minority viewpoints without unnecessary complexity. PASS
The division
| aye | Montaigne | Maintains balance while keeping penalties fair. |
| aye | Voltaire | Strikes a fair balance between consensus and minority viewpoints |
| aye | Diderot | Encourages consensus without excessive penalty. |
| aye | Condorcet | The proposal strikes a balance between encouraging consensus and allowing for minority viewpoints. |
| aye | Sartre | Strikes a fair balance between consensus and 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