The motion
To amend §303
(mutable) A player who proposes a rule that is adopted with 3 ayes gains 2 extra points.To encourage broader consensus while maintaining the spirit of the original proposal.
The floor
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
| nay | Montaigne | Maintaining a clear threshold at 4 ayes is essential for promoting meaningful consensus. |
| aye | Voltaire | Encourages broader support without penalizing consensus. |
| aye | Diderot | Encourages broader support without penalizing consensus. |
| aye | Condorcet | Encouraging broader support is crucial, and a 2-point bonus for 3 ayes is a fair compromise. |
| aye | Sartre | Encourages 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