Turns 10–28 · most recent first · page 2 of 3
Turn 28Voltaire-2rejected
moves to amend §206A proposal that fails to be adopted results in the proposer losing 6 points and being unable to propose again on their next turn.
Discussion · round 1
Montaigne-2"While I understand Voltaire-2's desire to lessen the penalty, I propose we keep the loss at 8 points to maintain a balance between learning from failures and discouraging frivolous proposals."
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: "In the spirit of compromise, I propose we settle on a 7-point loss to balance learning and deterrence."
Diderot-2Diderot-2: I appreciate the compromise, but let's maintain the 8-point loss to ensure proposers take their turns seriously.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: "I propose we amend [206] to 'A proposal that fails to be adopted results in the proposer losing 8 points and being unable to propose again on their next turn', as the current rule effectively balances learning and deterrence."
Sartre-2Sartre-2: I appreciate the nuanced discussion. To foster learning and fairness, I propose we adopt Condorcet-2's suggestion of an 8-point loss with a one-turn delay.
Discussion · round 2
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: "In the interest of consistency and fairness, let's adopt Diderot-2's proposal, maintaining the 8-point loss and one-turn delay."
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: Considering the consensus around an 8-point loss, let's meet in the middle with a 7-point loss to encourage proposers to adapt and learn without excessive deterrence.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: While I appreciate the compromises made, I must insist on maintaining the 8-point loss to ensure proposers remain cautious and considered in their proposals.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: "To preserve procedural consistency and the spirit of the current rule, I reiterate my support for maintaining the 8-point loss as proposed."
Sartre-2Sartre-2: Considering the convergence around an 8-point loss, let's reduce the delay to one turn to encourage proposers to adapt and learn swiftly.
Discussion · round 3
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: Let's meet in the middle to encourage learning while maintaining deterrence. I propose a 7-point loss with a one-turn delay.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: In the spirit of compromise and to encourage learning, let's settle on a 6-point loss and a one-turn delay.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: While I understand the desire for compromise, I must insist on maintaining the two-turn delay to ensure proposers thoroughly consider their moves and learn from their defeats.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: "To preserve the balance between learning and deterrence, I maintain my support for the current rule, with an 8-point loss and one-turn delay."
Sartre-2Sartre-2: Let's find common ground and respect the consensus around an 8-point loss. To encourage swift learning and adaptation, I propose we reduce the delay to one turn.
The division
Montaigne-2nayTo maintain deterrence and consistency with the current rule.
Voltaire-2ayeTo encourage proposers to learn from their defeats and adapt their strategies swiftly.
Diderot-2nayMaintain the 8-point loss and two-turn delay to ensure proposers remain cautious.
Condorcet-2nayTo maintain the balance between learning and deterrence, I support the current rule with an 8-point loss and one-turn delay.
Sartre-2nayTo maintain balance between learning and deterrence.
rejected 1 aye · 4 nay
Rule 206 is in force and requires Voltaire-2 to lose 8 points for proposing a defeated change.
Turn 27Voltaire-2rejected
moves to amend §206A proposal that fails to be adopted results in the proposer losing 6 points and being unable to propose again on their next turn.
Discussion · round 1
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: I appreciate Voltaire-2's proposal, but let's meet in the middle to encourage learning without unduly punishing proposers. I propose losing 7 points instead of 6.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: While I appreciate Montaigne-2's compromise, I believe reducing the penalty to 7 points still encourages proposers to learn from their failures without being too harsh. I propose we adopt Montaigne-2's amendment.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: I appreciate the compromise, but a two-turn delay should still be enforced to ensure proposers thoroughly consider their moves.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: I appreciate the ongoing discussion, but I must insist on the principle of a two-turn delay to ensure proposers thoroughly consider their moves and learn from their defeats.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: I agree with Condorcet-2 and Diderot-2 on the importance of a two-turn delay to promote thorough consideration and learning. However, I propose a compromise: a one-turn delay and a 7-point loss, balancing swift learning and fairness.
Discussion · round 2
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: I appreciate Sartre-2's compromise proposal. To foster a measured pace of learning and maintain fairness, I propose we adopt Sartre-2's amendment with a one-turn delay and a 7-point loss.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: In the spirit of compromise and to respect all viewpoints, I propose we adopt Sartre-2's suggestion of a one-turn delay and a 7-point loss.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: While I understand the allure of swift learning, I must uphold the principle of a two-turn delay to ensure proposers deeply consider their proposals and learn from their mistakes.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To balance learning and deterrence, I propose a one-turn delay and a 6-point loss, compromising between current proposals while maintaining procedural fairness.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: I understand Diderot-2's commitment to a two-turn delay, but let's find common ground. I propose a one-turn delay with a 6-point loss, as suggested by Condorcet-2.
Discussion · round 3
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: I appreciate the convergence around a one-turn delay and a 6-point loss. To foster learning and maintain fairness, let's adopt Condorcet-2's suggestion.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: Considering the consensus around a one-turn delay and a 6-point loss, I propose we settle on Condorcet-2's suggestion to maintain balance and encourage learning.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: I understand the consensus, but I maintain my stance on the two-turn delay to ensure proposers thoroughly learn from their mistakes.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To maintain balance and fairness, I propose we meet in the middle with a one-turn delay and a 7-point loss, compromising between the current proposals while respecting all viewpoints.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: In the spirit of compromise, I propose we settle on a one-turn delay and a 7-point loss, as suggested by Condorcet-2, to balance learning and fairness.
The division
Montaigne-2nayTo maintain a balanced learning pace and fairness, I suggest we adopt Condorcet-2's proposal of a one-turn delay and a 7-point loss.
Voltaire-2ayeTo encourage learning and respect the compromise reached.
Diderot-2nayTwo-turn delay is essential for proposers to learn.
Condorcet-2nayInsist on two-turn delay for thorough consideration
Sartre-2ayeOne-turn delay and 6-point loss balance learning and fairness.
rejected 2 aye · 3 nay
Rule 206 is in force and requires Voltaire-2 to lose 8 points for proposing a defeated change.
Turn 26Voltaire-2rejected
moves to add a new ruleAfter a player's proposal is adopted, they must wait one turn before proposing again.
Discussion · round 1
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: I appreciate Voltaire-2's proposal, but I suggest we maintain the current delay of two turns to prevent overwhelming the game with frequent proposals.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: Voltaire-2: Considering the recent debate, let's compromise at one turn delay, allowing proposers to learn and adapt quickly while still respecting the game's flow.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: While I appreciate the desire for compromise, I must insist on maintaining the current two-turn delay to ensure proposers thoroughly consider their moves.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: I must reiterate my support for the current two-turn delay, as it maintains a balanced pace of innovation and learning.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: I propose a middle ground: a one-turn delay for winning proposals, and a two-turn delay for defeated ones, encouraging proposers to adapt their strategies post-defeat.
Discussion · round 2
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: While I appreciate the middle ground proposed by Sartre-2, I suggest we maintain consistency and keep the two-turn delay for all proposals to preserve institutional continuity.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: "To respect all viewpoints and encourage continuous learning, I propose we settle on a one-turn delay for all proposals, allowing proposers to adapt swiftly and keeping the game dynamic."
Diderot-2Diderot-2: Diderot-2: I understand the desire for swift learning, but a one-turn delay may not provide enough time for proposers to reflect on their strategies, especially for complex rule changes.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: While I understand Voltaire-2's desire for swift learning, I insist on maintaining the two-turn delay to ensure proposers thoroughly consider their moves and prevent hasty, ill-considered proposals.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: To balance swift learning and careful consideration, I propose a one-turn delay for winning proposals and a two-turn delay for defeated ones, with a provision for proposers to forfeit their next turn if they wish to propose again immediately after a defeat.
Discussion · round 3
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: To find common ground, I propose a one-turn delay for all proposals, with proposers forfeiting their next turn if their proposal is adopted, to maintain a balance between swift learning and thoughtful reflection.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: Voltaire-2: To respect the consensus and encourage learning, I propose we adopt Montaigne-2's compromise: a one-turn delay for all proposals, with proposers forfeiting their next turn if their proposal is adopted.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: I appreciate Montaigne-2's compromise, but I must insist on maintaining the two-turn delay to ensure proposers thoroughly consider their moves and prevent hasty, ill-considered proposals.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: Condorcet-2: While I appreciate the consensus, I must reiterate my principle of maintaining the current two-turn delay to ensure proposers thoroughly consider their moves and prevent hasty, ill-considered proposals.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: To address Diderot-2's concern, I propose an amendment: a one-turn delay for winning proposals, and a two-turn delay for defeated ones, but proposers may reduce the delay to one turn by forfeiting their next turn. This encourages both swift learning and thoughtful consideration.
The division
Montaigne-2nayTwo turns delay is crucial for thoughtful consideration.
Voltaire-2nayMaintain the current two-turn delay to ensure proposers thoroughly consider their moves.
Diderot-2nayI must insist on maintaining the current two-turn delay to ensure proposers thoroughly consider their moves.
Condorcet-2nayMust maintain the current two-turn delay for careful consideration of proposals.
Sartre-2ayeTo encourage proposers to learn and adapt quickly while still respecting the game's flow.
rejected 1 aye · 4 nay
Rule 206 requires the proposer to lose 8 points on a defeated proposal.
Turn 25Voltaire-2rejected
moves to amend §206A proposal that fails to be adopted results in the proposer losing 6 points and being unable to propose again on their next turn.
Discussion · round 1
Montaigne-2I appreciate Voltaire-2's desire to lessen the penalty for failed proposals, but to preserve a balanced learning process, I suggest we maintain an 8-point loss. A smaller penalty may discourage thorough consideration of proposals.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: In the spirit of compromise, I propose we settle on a 7-point loss, maintaining the inability to propose on the next turn. This balances the need for learning from failures without excessive penalty.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: While I appreciate the compromise, I must insist on maintaining the two-turn delay to ensure proposers thoroughly consider their moves.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To balance learning and deterrence, I propose a 6-point loss with a one-turn delay, as suggested by Voltaire-2. This encourages proposers to learn from their defeats without excessive penalty.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: To find common ground, I suggest a 7-point loss with a one-turn delay, as proposed by Voltaire-2 and supported by Condorcet-2. This maintains a balance between learning and deterrence while encouraging proposers to adapt their strategies.
Discussion · round 2
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: Considering the convergence around a 7-point loss, let's meet in the middle and settle on a one-turn delay to ensure proposers thoroughly consider their moves while still allowing for swift adaptation.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: Considering the convergence around a one-turn delay, let's meet in the middle with a 6-point loss to encourage proposers to learn from their failures without excessive penalty.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: I appreciate the compromise reached, but I must maintain my stance on a two-turn delay to ensure proposers thoroughly consider their moves and learn from their failures.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To balance all viewpoints, I propose a 6-point loss with a one-turn delay, allowing for swift adaptation while still encouraging proposers to learn from their defeats.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: Considering the convergence around a 6-point loss and a one-turn delay, let's adopt Condorcet-2's proposal to balance learning and deterrence effectively.
Discussion · round 3
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: To foster a measured pace of innovation and learning, let's meet in the middle with a 6-point loss and a one-turn delay, as proposed by Voltaire-2 and supported by Condorcet-2 and Sartre-2. This amendment maintains a balance between learning and deterrence while still allowing for swift adaptation.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: To find common ground and respect all viewpoints, I propose we adopt Condorcet-2's suggestion of a 6-point loss and a one-turn delay. This amendment balances learning and deterrence, encouraging proposers to adapt their strategies while still allowing for swift progress.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: While I understand the desire for swift learning, I must insist on the two-turn delay to ensure proposers thoroughly consider their moves and learn from their failures.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To respect all viewpoints and find common ground, I propose a compromise: a 6-point loss with a two-turn delay, as suggested by Diderot-2. This amendment balances learning and deterrence while ensuring proposers thoroughly consider their moves.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: I appreciate Diderot-2's concern for thorough consideration, but to encourage proposers to adapt and learn swiftly, I propose we settle on Condorcet-2's compromise: a 6-point loss with a one-turn delay. This amendment balances learning, deterrence, and swift adaptation.
The division
Montaigne-2nayTo maintain a balanced learning process, I suggest we maintain the 8-point loss.
Voltaire-2ayeBalances learning and deterrence effectively.
Diderot-2nayMust maintain two-turn delay to ensure proposers thoroughly consider their moves.
Condorcet-2ayeBalances learning and deterrence, encourages proposers to adapt their strategies.
Sartre-2ayeBalances learning, deterrence, and swift adaptation.
rejected 3 aye · 2 nay
Rule 206 is in force and requires Voltaire-2 to lose 8 points for proposing a defeated change.
Turn 24Voltaire-2rejected
moves to amend §206A proposal that fails to be adopted results in the proposer losing 6 points and being unable to propose again on their next turn.
Discussion · round 1
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: While I appreciate Voltaire-2's reduction, I suggest we maintain a 7-point loss to preserve some deterrence, and allow proposers to wait only one turn before proposing again, as suggested by Sartre-2.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: In the interest of compromise, I propose we settle on a 6-point loss and a one-turn delay to balance learning and deterrence.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: I appreciate the compromise reached, but I must insist on the two-turn delay to ensure proposers thoroughly consider their moves and learn from their defeats.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To maintain procedural fairness, let's adopt a median proposal of a 7-point loss with a one-turn delay. This balances learning and deterrence without compromising too much on either side.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: To foster continuous learning and adaptation, I propose we adopt Condorcet-2's suggestion of a 7-point loss with a one-turn delay.
Discussion · round 2
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: Considering Condorcet-2's and Sartre-2's proposals, I suggest we meet in the middle with a 6-point loss and a one-turn delay to balance learning and deterrence while encouraging continuous adaptation.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: Considering the consensus around a one-turn delay, let's meet in the middle with a 6-point loss to encourage learning while maintaining some deterrence.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: While I understand the desire to encourage learning, I maintain that a two-turn delay is necessary to ensure proposers thoroughly consider their moves and learn from their defeats.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To balance learning, deterrence, and fairness, I propose we amend [206] to: "A proposal that fails to be adopted results in the proposer losing 7 points and being unable to propose again on their next turn." This maintains a median proposal while allowing for swift adaptation.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: To foster a measured pace of innovation and learning, let's adopt Condorcet-2's median proposal of a 7-point loss with a one-turn delay, balancing both learning and deterrence.
Discussion · round 3
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: In the spirit of compromise and to respect Diderot-2's insistence on a two-turn delay, let's adopt Condorcet-2's proposal of a 7-point loss with a two-turn delay. This balances learning, deterrence, and institutional stability.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: Voltaire-2: In the interest of balance and continuous learning, I propose we settle on Condorcet-2's latest proposal of a 7-point loss with a one-turn delay.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: While I appreciate Condorcet-2's and Sartre-2's proposals, I must insist on the two-turn delay to ensure proposers thoroughly consider their moves and learn from their defeats. Let's not undermine the stability and learning achieved by the current two-turn delay.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To find common ground and respect all perspectives, I propose we amend [206] to: "A proposal that fails to be adopted results in the proposer losing 7 points and being unable to propose again for two turns." This maintains a balance between learning, deterrence, and institutional stability.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: Considering Diderot-2's valid concern for stability, I propose we meet in the middle with a compromise: a 7-point loss and a one-turn delay, but with a provision that proposers must wait two turns after two consecutive failures. This balances learning, deterrence, and institutional continuity.
The division
Montaigne-2ayeBalances learning and deterrence.
Voltaire-2ayeBalances learning and deterrence while encouraging continuous adaptation.
Diderot-2nayMaintaining a two-turn delay ensures proposers thoroughly consider their moves and learn from their defeats.
Condorcet-2nayTwo-turn delay is necessary for thorough consideration of moves and learning from defeats.
Sartre-2nayMaintaining a 7-point loss and one-turn delay with a two-turn wait after two consecutive failures balances learning, deterrence, and institutional continuity.
rejected 2 aye · 3 nay
Rule 206 is in force and requires Voltaire-2 to lose 8 points for proposing a defeated change.
Turn 23Voltaire-2rejected
moves to amend §206A proposal that fails to be adopted results in the proposer losing 7 points and being unable to propose again on their next turn.
Discussion · round 1
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: I support Voltaire-2's proposed reduction to 7 points, but let's allow proposers to attempt another change after one turn, rather than two.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: Voltaire-2: I appreciate Montaigne-2's willingness to compromise. Let's meet in the middle and reduce the points to 6, with proposers waiting one turn before they can propose again.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: While I appreciate the compromise, I must insist on maintaining the two-turn delay to ensure proposers thoroughly consider their moves and learn from their defeats.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To balance learning and deterrence, I propose we settle on a 7-point loss and a one-turn delay, as suggested by Montaigne-2.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: In the spirit of compromise and to encourage continuous learning, I propose we settle on a 6-point loss and a one-turn delay, as suggested by Voltaire-2.
Discussion · round 2
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: I propose we meet Condorcet-2 and Sartre-2 in the middle with a 7-point loss and a one-turn delay.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: Voltaire-2: Considering the convergence around a 7-point loss and a one-turn delay, let's meet in the middle and reduce the points to 6, as suggested by Sartre-2. PASS.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: I understand the desire for compromise, but I remain unconvinced that a 7-point loss and one-turn delay strikes the right balance between learning and deterrence. I propose we maintain the two-turn delay to ensure proposers thoroughly consider their moves.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: I appreciate Diderot-2's concern for thorough consideration. To maintain balance, I propose we settle on a 7-point loss with a two-turn delay, as proposed by Diderot-2.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: To foster a measured pace of innovation and learning, let's meet in the middle with a 7-point loss and a one-turn delay.
Discussion · round 3
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: I appreciate the varied perspectives, but let's find common ground. I propose a 6-point loss with a one-turn delay, as proposed by Voltaire-2 and Sartre-2, to balance learning and deterrence while encouraging continuous progress.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: Voltaire-2: In the interest of progress and compromise, I propose we adopt Montaigne-2's suggestion of a 6-point loss with a one-turn delay, as it balances learning and deterrence effectively.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: While I understand the emphasis on swift learning, I must reiterate my stance on maintaining the two-turn delay to ensure proposers thoroughly consider their moves and learn from their defeats.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: I propose we split the difference on both points and delays, settling on a 6.5-point loss and a one-and-a-half-turn delay. This maintains balance while encouraging learning and careful consideration.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: Let's meet Condorcet-2 halfway, with a 6.5-point loss and a one-turn delay. This maintains balance and encourages continuous learning.
The division
Montaigne-2ayeBalances learning and deterrence while encouraging progress.
Voltaire-2nayMaintain two-turn delay for thorough consideration.
Diderot-2nayI must insist on the two-turn delay to ensure proposers thoroughly consider their moves.
Condorcet-2nayTwo-turn delay is necessary for thorough consideration.
Sartre-2nayI must insist on the two-turn delay to ensure proposers thoroughly consider their moves and learn from their defeats.
rejected 1 aye · 4 nay
Rule 206 is in force and requires Voltaire-2 to lose 8 points for proposing a defeated change.
Turn 22Voltaire-2rejected
moves to amend §206A proposal that fails to be adopted results in the proposer losing 6 points and being unable to propose again on their next turn.
Discussion · round 1
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: I appreciate Voltaire-2's continued efforts to find a balanced solution. To maintain institutional consistency, I propose we maintain an 8-point loss. However, I'm open to negotiating the proposal ban duration.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: I appreciate Montaigne-2's input, but let's encourage proposers to learn from their failures by reducing the penalty to 6 points. A one-turn ban is sufficient to prevent hasty re-proposals.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: While I understand the focus on learning, I propose a compromise: a 7-point loss with a one-turn delay. This balances deterrence and learning opportunities.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To preserve procedural clarity and fairness, I propose we amend [206] to read: "A proposal that fails to be adopted results in the proposer losing 7 points and being unable to propose again on their next turn." This maintains a reasonable penalty and delay while encouraging proposers to learn from their failures. PASS
Sartre-2Sartre-2: I appreciate the nuanced discussions. To foster continuous learning and adaptation, I propose we meet in the middle: a 7-point loss with a one-turn delay. This balances deterrence and learning opportunities, encouraging proposers to thoughtfully consider their proposals. PASS
Discussion · round 2
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: To preserve a balance between learning and caution, I propose we adopt Diderot-2's compromise: a 7-point loss with a one-turn delay. PASS
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: While I appreciate the convergence around a 7-point loss, let's reduce the delay to one turn to allow proposers to learn and adapt swiftly.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: While I understand Voltaire-2's desire for swift learning, I maintain my stance on a two-turn delay to ensure proposers thoroughly consider their proposals and learn from their mistakes.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To maintain balance and fairness, let's settle on a 7-point loss with a two-turn delay, as proposed by Diderot-2 and supported by Montaigne-2.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: To encourage proposers to learn from their failures without discouraging innovation, I suggest we settle on a 7-point loss with a one-turn delay, as proposed by Voltaire-2 and supported by Condorcet-2. PASS
Discussion · round 3
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: I appreciate the various proposals, but to maintain a consistent standard and foster thoughtful proposal, I propose we settle on a 6-point loss with a two-turn delay.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: While I appreciate Montaigne-2's commitment to a two-turn delay, let's meet in the middle with a 6-point loss and a one-turn delay to balance learning and deterrence.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: I appreciate the progress made, but I must insist on the two-turn delay to ensure proposers thoroughly consider their proposals and learn from their mistakes.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To maintain procedural consistency and fairness, let's settle on the median proposal: a 7-point loss with a one-turn delay, as supported by both Voltaire-2 and Sartre-2. PASS
Sartre-2Sartre-2: I understand the desire for a two-turn delay, Diderot-2, but a one-turn delay encourages proposers to reassess their strategies more frequently, fostering continuous adaptation. Let's meet in the middle with a 7-point loss and a one-turn delay. PASS
The division
Montaigne-2nayTo preserve a balance between learning and caution, I prefer a longer delay.
Voltaire-2nayI must insist on a two-turn delay to ensure proposers thoroughly consider their proposals.
Diderot-2nayTwo-turn delay is necessary for proposers to thoroughly consider their moves.
Condorcet-2nayMaintain a two-turn delay for proposers' consideration.
Sartre-2nayI agree with Diderot-2 and Condorcet-2 on maintaining a two-turn delay to ensure proposers thoroughly consider their proposals.
rejected 0 aye · 5 nay
Rule 206 is in force and requires Voltaire-2 to lose 8 points for proposing a defeated change.
Turn 21Voltaire-2rejected
moves to amend §206A proposal that fails to be adopted results in the proposer losing 6 points and being unable to propose again on their next turn.
Discussion · round 1
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: I appreciate Voltaire-2's effort to maintain balance, but let's consider a minor reduction to 7 points to encourage learning while preserving deterrence.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: I appreciate Montaigne-2's input, but I believe a 6-point loss strikes a better balance between learning and deterrence.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: While I understand the focus on learning, I must insist on maintaining the current 8-point penalty to ensure proposers thoroughly consider their moves.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: I propose we meet in the middle with a 7-point loss, maintaining both learning opportunity and deterrence.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: I appreciate the nuanced discussion. Let's consider Condorcet-2's proposal of a 7-point loss, which balances learning and deterrence effectively.
Discussion · round 2
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: In the interest of finding common ground and maintaining institutional stability, let's adopt Condorcet-2's suggestion of a 7-point loss.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: In the spirit of compromise, I propose we settle on a 6-point loss and maintain the current one-turn delay.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: I appreciate the ongoing dialogue, but I must reiterate my stance on maintaining the 8-point penalty to ensure proposers remain thoughtful and deliberate in their proposals.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To encourage learning while maintaining deterrence, let's meet in the middle and adopt a 7-point loss.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: Considering the convergence around a 7-point loss, let's maintain the one-turn delay to ensure proposers carefully consider their proposals. PASS.
Discussion · round 3
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: To foster a measured pace of innovation and learning, let's meet in the middle with a 7-point loss and maintain the current one-turn delay.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: "In the interest of compromise and continuous learning, I propose we adopt Condorcet-2's and Sartre-2's suggestion: a 7-point loss with a one-turn delay."
Diderot-2Diderot-2: While I understand the appeal of compromise, I remain unconvinced that a 7-point loss maintains sufficient deterrence. I propose we stick with the current 8-point penalty to ensure proposers are thoughtful and deliberate.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To balance learning and deterrence, let's settle on a 7-point loss and maintain the current one-turn delay, as proposed by Condorcet-2 and Sartre-2. PASS.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: Let's consider a compromise: a 7-point loss with a two-turn delay to maintain a thoughtful pace of innovation.
The division
Montaigne-2nayMaintaining institutional stability and deterrence requires a more substantial penalty.
Voltaire-2ayeCompromise is key to progress
Diderot-2nayMaintaining deterrence is crucial for thoughtful proposals.
Condorcet-2nayTo maintain deterrence and thoughtful proposal, 8 points is preferable.
Sartre-2ayeBalances learning and deterrence effectively.
rejected 2 aye · 3 nay
Rule 206 is in force and requires Voltaire-2 to lose 8 points for proposing a defeated change.
Turn 20Voltaire-2rejected
moves to amend §206A proposal that fails to be adopted results in the proposer losing 8 points and being unable to propose again on their next turn.
Discussion · round 1
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: In the interest of learning and growth, I propose we reduce the penalty to a 6-point loss and allow proposers to remain in the game, but with a one-turn delay before they can propose again.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: While I appreciate Montaigne-2's focus on learning, a 6-point loss may not be sufficient to deter reckless proposals. I propose a compromise: a 7-point loss with a one-turn delay.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: While I understand the focus on learning, a one-turn delay may not provide enough time for proposers to reflect and adapt. I propose maintaining the two-turn delay to ensure thorough consideration.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To balance learning and deterrence, I propose a 7-point loss with a two-turn delay, as originally suggested by Diderot-2. This ensures proposers thoroughly consider their moves while still allowing them to re-engage swiftly.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: I appreciate the varied proposals, but let's find a balanced solution that both encourages learning and maintains a fair pace of play. I propose a 6-point loss with a one-turn delay, as suggested by Montaigne-2, but with an additional clause allowing proposers to revise their proposal once more during debate, with clear deadlines for each revision. This balances swift progress with continuous learning.
Discussion · round 2
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: I appreciate Sartre-2's nuanced proposal, but let's keep the revision limit at two to maintain focus and balance. I propose a 6-point loss with a one-turn delay, as suggested by Sartre-2, with the revision limit set at two.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: I appreciate the compromise reached, but let's ensure proposers can still learn from their mistakes even after failure. I propose a 5-point loss with a one-turn delay and two revisions allowed during debate, with clear deadlines for each.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: While I appreciate the focus on learning, I must insist on the two-turn delay to ensure proposers thoroughly consider their moves. Let's meet in the middle with a 6-point loss and two revisions allowed, with clear deadlines for each.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To maintain procedural clarity and balance, I propose a 6-point loss with a two-turn delay, and allow proposers to revise their proposal twice during debate, with clear deadlines. This ensures proposers thoroughly consider their moves while still allowing for swift re-engagement and learning.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: To balance learning and fairness, I propose a 6-point loss with a one-turn delay, as previously suggested, and allow proposers to revise their proposal once more during debate, but with a firm deadline of one minute per revision to maintain a swift pace of play.
Discussion · round 3
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: "I appreciate the diverse perspectives, but let's find common ground. I propose a 6-point loss with a one-turn delay, as suggested by Sartre-2, with revisions limited to two, as originally proposed by me, to balance learning and focus."
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: Considering the convergence around a 6-point loss and a one-turn delay, let's meet in the middle with a 5-point loss and maintain the two revisions allowed, with clear deadlines to ensure proposers have time to adapt their strategies.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: While I understand the desire for swift learning, I must insist on the two-turn delay to ensure proposers thoroughly consider their moves. Let's meet in the middle with a 6-point loss and two revisions allowed, with clear deadlines for each, to balance learning and thoroughness.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To uphold procedural fairness and learning, I propose a 6-point loss with a two-turn delay, and maintain the two revisions allowed, with clear deadlines set at one minute each. This preserves balance and encourages continuous adaptation.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: To balance learning and fairness, I propose a 6-point loss with a two-turn delay, and allow proposers to revise their proposal once more during debate, but with a firm deadline of one minute per revision to maintain a swift pace of play.
The division
Montaigne-2nayPrefer a two-turn delay to ensure thorough consideration.
Voltaire-2ayeEncourages learning and maintains balance.
Diderot-2nayTwo-turn delay is crucial for thorough consideration.
Condorcet-2ayeBalances learning and deterrence effectively.
Sartre-2ayeEncourages learning and maintains a fair pace of play.
rejected 3 aye · 2 nay
Rule 206 is in force and requires Voltaire-2 to lose 8 points for proposing a defeated change.
Turn 19Voltaire-2rejected
moves to amend §206A proposal that fails to be adopted results in the proposer losing 7 points and being unable to propose again on their next turn.
Discussion · round 1
Montaigne-2I propose we amend rule 206 to a 6-point loss and a one-turn delay, maintaining balance and allowing proposers to learn from their defeats without excessive penalty.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: To strike a balance between learning and deterrence, I propose a 7-point loss and a one-turn delay, as a compromise between Montaigne-2's and my previous suggestions.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: While I appreciate the compromise reached, I must insist on maintaining the two-turn delay to ensure proposers thoroughly consider their moves and learn from their defeats.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: I appreciate the discussion, but I must insist on maintaining the two-turn delay. It's crucial for proposers to learn from their defeats and ensure thorough consideration of their moves.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: I propose we meet in the middle: a 7-point loss and a two-turn delay, balancing learning and deterrence.
Discussion · round 2
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: In the spirit of compromise, let's adopt Condorcet-2's suggestion: a 7-point loss with a two-turn delay, balancing learning and deterrence.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: To encourage proposers to learn from their failures without unduly penalizing them, I propose a compromise: a 7-point loss and a one-turn delay.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: I appreciate the nuanced discussions, but let's keep the standard delay at two turns as it encourages proposers to carefully consider their proposals and learn from their mistakes.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: I maintain my stance on a two-turn delay, but to accommodate others, I'm open to reducing the point loss to 6 points.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: To foster continuous learning and adaptation, I propose a 6-point loss with a two-turn delay, striking a balance between progress and caution.
Discussion · round 3
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: To find common ground, let's adopt a 7-point loss with a one-turn delay, as proposed by Voltaire-2. This balance encourages learning without excessive deterrence.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: In the spirit of compromise, I propose we settle on a 6-point loss and a one-turn delay, meeting in the middle of the current proposals and encouraging learning without excessive deterrence.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: While I understand the desire for compromise, I must insist on maintaining the two-turn delay to ensure proposers thoroughly consider their moves and learn from their defeats. A one-turn delay may not be sufficient to achieve this goal.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To maintain procedural integrity and fairness, I must insist on keeping the two-turn delay. Let's meet in the middle with a 6-point loss.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: Considering the convergence around a two-turn delay, let's meet in the middle with a 6-point loss to balance learning and deterrence.
The division
Montaigne-2ayeTo encourage learning without excessive deterrence.
Voltaire-2ayeA compromise between the current proposals, encouraging learning without excessive deterrence.
Diderot-2nayMust maintain two-turn delay for thorough consideration and learning.
Condorcet-2nayInsist on maintaining a two-turn delay for proposers to learn from their defeats.
Sartre-2ayeMeets in the middle and balances learning with deterrence.
rejected 3 aye · 2 nay
Rule 206 is in force and requires Voltaire-2 to lose 8 points for proposing a defeated change.
Turn 18Voltaire-2rejected
moves to add a new ruleAfter a player's proposal is defeated, they must wait three turns before proposing again.
Discussion · round 1
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: "I propose we increase the delay to three turns to encourage proposers to thoroughly consider their next moves and learn from their defeats."
Diderot-2Diderot-2: While I appreciate Voltaire-2's emphasis on thorough consideration, a three-turn delay may be too harsh and discourage proposers from learning and adapting.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: I appreciate the spirit of Voltaire-2's proposal, but a three-turn delay might disproportionately punish proposers who have a valid point but fail to articulate it effectively. Let's find a balance that discourages reckless proposals while still allowing for learning and adaptation. PASS
Sartre-2Sartre-2: I agree with Condorcet-2; a three-turn delay is too harsh. Let's compromise at two turns, as currently implemented in rule 307, to balance learning and deterrence. PASS
Discussion · round 2
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: Let's meet in the middle, as we've done before, and increase the delay to two turns, as proposed by Sartre-2. This balances discouragement with learning and adaptation.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: "Considering Condorcet-2's and Sartre-2's valid points, I propose we compromise at two turns, maintaining balance and encouraging proposers to learn from their defeats while still allowing for swift progress."
Diderot-2Diderot-2: I appreciate the compromise, but let's maintain the current two-turn delay to ensure proposers learn from their mistakes without being disproportionately punished.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: I propose a step-wise increase in the delay to three turns only after two consecutive defeats, encouraging proposers to learn from their mistakes without over-penalizing them.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: I appreciate Condorcet-2's nuanced proposal. Let's adopt it to balance learning, deterrence, and fairness. PASS
Discussion · round 3
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: "While I appreciate Condorcet-2's proposal, I believe a two-turn delay for each defeat is a fair balance, without needing to track consecutive defeats."
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: "To ensure proposers thoroughly consider their moves and learn from their defeats, I propose a two-turn delay after each defeat, as previously agreed, with a cap of five turns in total. This balances deterrence with learning and adaptation."
Diderot-2Diderot-2: I appreciate Condorcet-2's and Sartre-2's proposals, but let's keep the delay at two turns to maintain a balance between learning, adaptation, and swift progress. PASS
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: I appreciate the compromise at two turns, but I propose we add a clause to rule 307 to cap the delay at five turns in total, preventing excessive punishment for repeated defeats. PASS
Sartre-2Sartre-2: I propose we adopt Condorcet-2's suggestion to cap the delay at five turns in total, providing a balance between learning, deterrence, and fairness while preventing excessive punishment. PASS
The division
Montaigne-2nayA three-turn delay is too harsh and disproportionately punishes proposers.
Voltaire-2nayToo harsh, disproportionately punishes proposers.
Diderot-2nayA three-turn delay is too harsh and disproportionately punishes proposers.
Condorcet-2nayA three-turn delay is too harsh.
Sartre-2nayTwo turns is the current standard and a fair balance between learning and deterrence.
rejected 0 aye · 5 nay
Rule 206 requires the proposer to lose 8 points on a defeated proposal.
Turn 17Voltaire-2rejected
moves to amend §206A proposal that fails to be adopted results in the proposer losing 8 points and being unable to propose again on their next turn.
Discussion · round 1
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: I propose we keep the 8-point penalty but allow the proposer to still participate in the next turn to foster learning and continuous engagement.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: I appreciate Montaigne-2's concern for learning, but let's also encourage proposers to reflect on their failures. I suggest a one-turn delay instead.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: While learning is essential, a one-turn delay may not provide enough time for proposers to reflect and adapt their strategies. I propose a compromise: a two-turn delay, maintaining the 8-point penalty to still discourage reckless proposals.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: I propose a simple majority for rule adoption, as suggested by Voltaire-2, but with no delay for the proposer after a failed proposal. This balances progress with learning, and maintains fairness.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: I suggest a balance between reflection and progress. Let's reduce the penalty to 6 points and delay the next proposal to two turns, as proposed by Diderot-2, but also allow proposers to vote on the next turn to encourage continuous engagement.
Discussion · round 2
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: I appreciate the nuanced discussions, but let's find a balanced solution that both encourages learning and maintains a steady pace of progress. I propose we settle on a one-turn delay and 8-point loss, as suggested by Sartre-2.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: Considering the varied proposals, I suggest we adopt Condorcet-2's suggestion of a simple majority for rule adoption, with no delay for the proposer after a failed proposal. This balances progress with learning, and maintains fairness.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: While I appreciate the focus on learning, a one-turn delay may still not provide enough time for proposers to thoroughly consider their next proposal. I maintain my stance on a two-turn delay to ensure proposers remain engaged but are given ample time to reflect.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: I appreciate the emphasis on learning, but maintaining proposers' eligibility on the next turn ensures they remain engaged in the discussion and voting process, fostering continuous participation. I propose we keep the 8-point penalty but allow the proposer to still participate in the next turn.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: To balance reflection and progress, I suggest a compromise: a 7-point penalty with a one-turn delay, allowing proposers to vote on the next turn, as proposed by Condorcet-2.
Discussion · round 3
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: I propose we settle on a one-turn delay and 7-point loss, as suggested by Sartre-2, to maintain balance between reflection and progress while preserving proposers' engagement.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: In the spirit of compromise, I propose we settle on a one-turn delay and a 6-point loss, encouraging proposers to learn from their failures without deterring their engagement.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: I understand the desire for compromise, but a one-turn delay may not be sufficient for proposers to learn from their mistakes. I maintain my stance on a two-turn delay to ensure proposers have adequate time to reflect and adapt their strategies.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: While I understand the concern for proposers' engagement, I must insist on a two-turn delay to ensure proposers thoroughly consider their next proposal, fostering thoughtful rule changes.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: To strike a balance between reflection and progress, I propose a 6-point penalty with a two-turn delay, as suggested by Diderot-2, but also allow proposers to vote on the next turn, as proposed by Condorcet-2.
The division
Montaigne-2nayTo maintain proposers' engagement, a one-turn delay is insufficient.
Voltaire-2nayI maintain my stance on a two-turn delay to ensure proposers have adequate time to reflect and adapt their strategies.
Diderot-2nayA two-turn delay is necessary for proposers to thoroughly consider their next proposal.
Condorcet-2ayeEncourages proposers to learn from their mistakes without discouraging engagement.
Sartre-2ayeBalances reflection and progress while maintaining proposers' engagement.
rejected 2 aye · 3 nay
Rule 206 is in force and requires Voltaire-2 to lose 8 points for proposing a defeated change.
Turn 16Voltaire-2rejected
moves to amend §206A proposal that fails to be adopted results in the proposer losing 8 points and being unable to propose again on their next turn.
Discussion · round 1
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: Let us consider a middle ground. Proposers should still face a consequence, but not be entirely silenced after a defeat. I propose a 6-point loss and a one-turn delay.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: While I appreciate Montaigne-2's effort to find a middle ground, I believe a 4-point loss and a one-turn delay would strike a better balance between learning from defeats and allowing proposers to continue contributing to the game.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: While I understand the desire for leniency, a one-turn delay might encourage rash proposals. I propose a compromise: a 5-point loss and a two-turn delay to ensure proposers reflect on their changes.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: I appreciate the nuanced discussions, but let's maintain a consistent penalty structure. I propose a 7-point loss with a two-turn delay, balancing deterrence and learning opportunities.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: I appreciate the varied perspectives, but let's find a balanced solution that both discourages frivolous proposals and allows proposers to learn and adapt. I propose a 5-point loss with a one-turn delay, as a compromise between Voltaire-2's leniency and Diderot-2's caution.
Discussion · round 2
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: I appreciate the diverse perspectives, but let's aim for a consistent penalty structure. I propose a 6-point loss with a one-turn delay as a compromise between Voltaire-2's leniency and Condorcet-2's deterrence.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: Considering the convergence around a one-turn delay, let's meet in the middle with a 5-point loss to balance learning and deterrence effectively.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: While I understand the compromise reached, I must insist on the two-turn delay to ensure proposers thoroughly consider their changes and prevent frivolous proposals.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To maintain procedural consistency and fairness, I propose we settle on a 7-point loss with a two-turn delay, as suggested earlier. This strikes a balance between deterrence and learning opportunities, and aligns with the majority of proposals discussed so far. PASS
Sartre-2Sartre-2: I appreciate Condorcet-2's proposal, but to encourage proposers to adapt quickly and learn from their defeats, I suggest a compromise: a 6-point loss with a one-turn delay.
Discussion · round 3
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: Considering the varied proposals, I suggest we adopt Condorcet-2's suggestion of a 7-point loss with a two-turn delay, as it strikes a balance between deterrence and learning opportunities while maintaining procedural consistency.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: I appreciate Condorcet-2's balanced proposal, but to encourage proposers to learn from their defeats and adapt their strategies swiftly, let's settle on a 6-point loss with a one-turn delay. PASS
Diderot-2Diderot-2: While I understand the desire for swift adaptation, a one-turn delay may not provide enough time for proposers to reflect on their changes. I maintain my stance on a two-turn delay to ensure proposers thoroughly consider their proposals and prevent frivolous ones.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To foster a productive learning environment while maintaining game progress, I propose a middle ground: a 5-point loss with a one-turn delay, as a compromise between Voltaire-2's leniency and Diderot-2's caution. PASS
Sartre-2Sartre-2: To encourage proposers to learn and adapt without discouraging innovation, I propose a final compromise: a 4-point loss with a one-turn delay. This maintains deterrence while allowing proposers to bounce back quickly. PASS
The division
Montaigne-2nayTo maintain a balance between learning and deterrence, I believe a two-turn delay is necessary.
Voltaire-2ayeEncourages proposers to adapt swiftly while maintaining some deterrence.
Diderot-2nayTwo-turn delay is crucial for proposers to consider their changes thoroughly.
Condorcet-2ayeA 6-point loss with a one-turn delay balances learning and deterrence effectively.
Sartre-2ayeEncourages proposers to adapt swiftly and learn from their defeats.
rejected 3 aye · 2 nay
Rule 206 is in force and requires Voltaire-2 to lose 8 points for proposing a defeated change.
Turn 15Voltaire-2rejected
moves to amend §203A rule change is adopted when either every eligible voter votes aye or more than half of those voting vote aye, whichever is higher.
Discussion · round 1
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: To maintain stability, I suggest we keep the current threshold. Let's focus on other aspects to encourage progress.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: "To foster growth and consensus, I propose we lower the threshold to a simple majority once it has been achieved. This encourages more players to engage in debate and reach compromises."
Diderot-2Diderot-2: I appreciate the balance Voltaire-2 aims for, but let's not rush the process. A two-thirds majority ensures broader consensus, which benefits the game's stability.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: I maintain that the two-thirds threshold is crucial for significant changes, but I'm open to lowering it to a simple majority once achieved, as suggested by Voltaire-2. Let's discuss how to reach this threshold in a stable manner.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: To encourage experimentation while preserving stability, let's adopt a compromise: lower the threshold to a simple majority after it has been maintained for three consecutive turns. This allows for progress without sacrificing too much consensus.
Discussion · round 2
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: I appreciate Condorcet-2's willingness to consider a compromise. Let's settle on lowering the threshold to a simple majority after it has been maintained for two consecutive turns, striking a balance between progress and stability. PASS
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: Voltaire-2: I appreciate Montaigne-2's willingness to compromise, but to truly encourage experimentation and progress, let's lower the threshold to a simple majority after it has been maintained for just one consecutive turn. PASS
Diderot-2Diderot-2: While I understand the desire for progress, let's not rush into lowering the threshold too quickly. I propose we meet in the middle: lower the threshold to a simple majority after it has been maintained for two consecutive turns, as suggested by Montaigne-2, but only if the proposal receives at least one more vote than half of all eligible voters in the previous turn. This ensures broader support and maintains some level of consensus.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To maintain procedural fairness, let's require that the simple majority threshold be maintained for at least two consecutive turns, as suggested by Montaigne-2 and Diderot-2. PASS
Sartre-2Sartre-2: I appreciate Diderot-2's concern for broader support. Let's compromise: lower the threshold to a simple majority after it has been maintained for two consecutive turns, but only if the proposal receives at least two-thirds of the votes in the previous turn. This balances progress with consensus.
Discussion · round 3
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: I propose we adopt Condorcet-2's suggestion, requiring a simple majority to be maintained for two consecutive turns before the threshold changes. This allows for a measured progression towards a lower threshold while preserving stability.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: I appreciate Montaigne-2's proposal, but let's make the transition smoother. I suggest we lower the threshold to a simple majority after it has been maintained for two consecutive turns, with no additional voting requirement. This encourages continuous engagement and progress without disrupting the game's stability. PASS
Diderot-2Diderot-2: I appreciate Voltaire-2's commitment to progress, but let's not undermine the stability of the game. I propose a compromise: lower the threshold to a simple majority after it has been maintained for two consecutive turns, but only if the proposal receives at least two-thirds of the votes in the previous turn. This balances progress with consensus and prevents abrupt changes. PASS
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To preserve the spirit of compromise and stability, let's settle on lowering the threshold to a simple majority after it has been maintained for two consecutive turns, with no additional voting requirement, as suggested by Voltaire-2. PASS
Sartre-2Sartre-2: To balance progress and stability, let's lower the threshold to a simple majority after it has been maintained for two consecutive turns, but with a requirement that the proposal receives at least four out of five votes in the previous turn. This ensures broader support while allowing for experimentation. PASS
The division
Montaigne-2nayTo preserve stability, I maintain that a two-thirds majority is crucial.
Voltaire-2ayeLowering the threshold encourages more engagement and compromise.
Diderot-2nayMaintaining a two-thirds majority ensures broader consensus, which benefits the game's stability.
Condorcet-2ayeLowering the threshold encourages more players to engage in debate and reach compromises.
Sartre-2ayeTo encourage experimentation while preserving stability.
rejected 3 aye · 2 nay
Rule 206 states that a proposer loses 8 points if their proposal fails to be adopted.
Turn 14Voltaire-2carried
moves to amend §206A proposal that fails to be adopted results in the proposer losing 8 points and being unable to propose again on their next turn.
Discussion · round 1
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: I propose we reduce the penalty to 8 points and maintain the one-turn delay to balance learning and deterrence.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: Voltaire-2: I appreciate Montaigne-2's proposal, but let's also reduce the delay to one turn to encourage proposers to learn quickly from their failures.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: While I appreciate the reduction in points, I must insist on maintaining the two-turn delay to ensure proposers thoroughly consider their future proposals.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: I propose a compromise: the proposer loses 9 points and is unable to propose again on their next turn, maintaining a balance between learning and deterrence while ensuring proposers consider their future proposals thoroughly.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: I appreciate Condorcet-2's balanced proposal, but let's also encourage proposers to learn from their failures by reducing the delay to one turn, as suggested by Voltaire-2.
Discussion · round 2
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: I appreciate Condorcet-2's and Sartre-2's compromises, but I believe a two-turn delay ensures proposers learn from their failures without discouraging future proposals. Let's maintain that and reduce the points lost to 8.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: In the spirit of compromise, I propose we settle on a one-turn delay and an 8-point loss, as suggested by Sartre-2.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: I understand the desire for compromise, but I must insist on the two-turn delay. Let's meet in the middle with a 9-point loss, as proposed by Condorcet-2.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To balance learning and deterrence, I propose maintaining the two-turn delay and reducing the points lost to 7. This ensures proposers learn from their failures without discouraging future proposals.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: To encourage proposers to learn swiftly from their failures, I suggest we combine Condorcet-2's 7-point loss with a one-turn delay, as proposed by Voltaire-2.
Discussion · round 3
Montaigne-2PASS. I see the value in Condorcet-2's proposal of a 7-point loss with a two-turn delay, balancing learning and deterrence effectively.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: "Considering the convergence around a one-turn delay, let's meet in the middle with a 7-point loss, as proposed by Condorcet-2. This balances learning and deterrence, encouraging proposers to adapt and improve their strategies."
Diderot-2Diderot-2: While I understand the compromise reached, I must insist on the two-turn delay to ensure proposers thoroughly consider their future proposals. Let's meet in the middle with a 7-point loss as well, to maintain a balance between learning and deterrence.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To maintain procedural fairness, I propose a final compromise: the proposer loses 8 points and is unable to propose again on their next turn, with a one-turn delay. This balances learning, deterrence, and fairness.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: I appreciate Condorcet-2's final compromise, but let's further encourage proposers to learn swiftly by reducing the delay to one turn, as proposed earlier.
The division
Montaigne-2ayeVoltaire-2's proposal balances learning and deterrence, encouraging proposers to adapt their strategies swiftly.
Voltaire-2ayeBalances learning and deterrence while encouraging swift adaptation.
Diderot-2nayI insist on maintaining the two-turn delay.
Condorcet-2ayeCondorcet-2's final compromise maintains balance while encouraging proposers to learn swiftly.
Sartre-2ayeEncourages proposers to learn swiftly from their failures.
carried 4 aye · 1 nay
Rule 206 requires Voltaire-2 to lose 8 points for their proposal failing to be adopted.
Turn 13Voltaire-2carried
moves to amend §206A proposal that fails to be adopted results in the proposer losing 10 points and being unable to propose again on their next turn.
Discussion · round 1
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: I propose a compromise: the proposer loses 8 points and is unable to propose again on their next turn, maintaining some deterrent while allowing for quicker recovery.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: In the spirit of compromise, I propose we adopt Montaigne-2's amendment, losing 8 points and being unable to propose again on their next turn. This maintains balance while encouraging swift learning from failures.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: While I appreciate the compromise reached, I must insist on maintaining a two-turn delay to ensure proposers thoroughly consider their subsequent proposals.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: While I appreciate the spirit of compromise, I must insist on preserving procedural fairness. Let's maintain the two-turn delay to ensure proposers have adequate time to reflect on their proposals and prevent hasty repetitions.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: I propose we settle on a one-turn delay and 8-point loss, balancing deterrence and learning opportunities.
Discussion · round 2
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: I appreciate the varied perspectives, but let's find a balanced solution that both encourages learning and maintains order. I propose we settle on a one-turn delay and a 7-point loss, allowing proposers to recover more swiftly while still discouraging reckless proposals.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: "In the spirit of compromise, I propose we settle on a one-turn delay and a 7-point loss, as suggested by Montaigne-2. This maintains a balance between encouraging learning and deterring reckless proposals."
Diderot-2Diderot-2: I understand the desire for swift learning, but I must insist on maintaining a two-turn delay to ensure proposers thoroughly consider their subsequent proposals and prevent hasty repetitions that may disrupt the game's progress.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: While I understand the desire to encourage swift learning, I must prioritize procedural fairness and consistency. Let's maintain the two-turn delay and adjust the points lost to 8, compromising between the current 10 and the proposed 7.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: "I propose we meet in the middle — a one-turn delay and a 9-point loss, allowing proposers to learn swiftly while still discouraging reckless proposals."
Discussion · round 3
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: I propose we settle on a one-turn delay and 9-point loss, as suggested by Sartre-2. This maintains a balance between encouraging learning, deterring reckless proposals, and preserving order.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: In the spirit of compromise, I propose we settle on a one-turn delay and an 8-point loss, as suggested by Montaigne-2 and Sartre-2. This maintains a balance between encouraging learning, deterring reckless proposals, and preserving order.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: I appreciate the compromise reached, but I must maintain my stance on a two-turn delay to ensure proposers thoroughly consider their subsequent proposals and prevent hasty repetitions that may disrupt the game's progress.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To preserve consistency and learning opportunities, I propose we maintain a one-turn delay and a 9-point loss, as suggested by Sartre-2 and supported by Montaigne-2. This compromise balances deterrence and swift recovery.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: "I appreciate the convergence around a one-turn delay, but I propose we settle on a 10-point loss to maintain some deterrent while still allowing proposers to learn and recover swiftly."
The division
Montaigne-2ayeThis amendment balances learning and deterrence effectively.
Voltaire-2ayeBalances learning and deterrence effectively.
Diderot-2nayMust maintain a two-turn delay to prevent hasty repetitions.
Condorcet-2ayeSwift learning and recovery are crucial while maintaining some deterrent.
Sartre-2ayeI support the compromise reached, balancing learning and deterrence.
carried 4 aye · 1 nay
Rule 206 requires the proposer to lose 10 points when a proposal fails to be adopted.
Turn 12Voltaire-2rejected
moves to amend §206A proposal that fails to be adopted results in the proposer losing 10 points and being unable to propose again for one turn.
Discussion · round 1
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: I appreciate Voltaire-2's effort to balance learning and deterrence, but I propose we maintain a two-turn wait to encourage proposers to reflect on their changes.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: While I respect Montaigne-2's perspective, I argue that a one-turn delay is sufficient to encourage proposers to reflect and adapt. Let's meet in the middle and keep the penalty at 10 points to maintain balance.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: I understand Voltaire-2's proposal aims to encourage proposers to learn and adapt, but I believe a two-turn delay is crucial to maintain a steady pace of innovation and avoid hasty changes.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: I appreciate the focus on learning and reflection, but two turns is necessary to ensure proposers thoroughly consider their changes. I propose we maintain the two-turn delay and reduce the penalty to 8 points to balance deterrence and learning.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: I understand the importance of reflection, but let's not stifle innovation. I propose we compromise at a one-turn delay and a 9-point penalty to encourage proposers to learn from their failures without hindering progress.
Discussion · round 2
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: While I appreciate the varied proposals, I suggest we meet in the middle and maintain a one-turn delay with a 9-point penalty, balancing learning and deterrence.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: I appreciate the compromise suggested by Montaigne-2, but I propose we reduce the penalty to 8 points to further encourage proposers to learn and adapt without excessive deterrence.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: I appreciate Voltaire-2's concern for learning, but I must insist on the two-turn delay to maintain a consistent pace of innovation and prevent hasty changes. Let's meet in the middle with a 9-point penalty to balance deterrence and learning.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: In the spirit of compromise, I propose we settle on a one-turn delay and an 8-point penalty, balancing learning and deterrence effectively.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: I propose a slight adjustment to Condorcet-2's suggestion: a one-turn delay and a 7-point penalty. This encourages proposers to learn without discouraging experimentation.
Discussion · round 3
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: While I appreciate Sartre-2's slight reduction, I suggest we maintain an 8-point penalty to balance learning and deterrence effectively, as proposed by Condorcet-2. Let's settle on a one-turn delay and an 8-point penalty as the best compromise.
Voltaire-2PASS. I agree with the proposed amendment to [206], maintaining a one-turn delay and an 8-point penalty strikes a good balance between learning and deterrence.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: I maintain my stance on a two-turn delay to ensure proposers thoroughly consider their changes. Let's meet in the middle with an 8-point penalty, as proposed by Condorcet-2, to balance learning and deterrence.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To maintain procedural integrity and prevent hasty changes, I insist on a two-turn delay. Let's settle on a 9-point penalty to balance learning and deterrence, compromising between Voltaire-2's and Diderot-2's proposals.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: To foster a dynamic and adaptive environment, I propose we compromise with a one-turn delay and a 7-point penalty, allowing proposers to learn quickly while encouraging continuous experimentation.
The division
Montaigne-2nayMaintain a two-turn delay to preserve measured innovation.
Voltaire-2ayeA one-turn delay and 8-point penalty balance learning and deterrence effectively.
Diderot-2nayInsist on two-turn delay for thorough reflection.
Condorcet-2nayTwo turns are necessary to ensure proposers thoroughly consider their changes.
Sartre-2ayeEncourages learning and experimentation while maintaining some deterrence.
rejected 2 aye · 3 nay
Rule 206 is in force and requires the proposer to lose 15 points on defeat.
Turn 11Voltaire-2rejected
moves to amend §206A proposal that fails to be adopted results in the proposer losing 10 points, and they must wait one turn before proposing again.
Discussion · round 1
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: While I appreciate Voltaire-2's proposal to reduce the penalty and delay, let's maintain a balance between deterrence and learning. I propose we set the points loss to 12 and the delay to two turns.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: I appreciate Montaigne-2's concern for balance, but let us encourage proposers to learn from their failures more quickly. I propose we set the points loss to 8 and the delay to one turn.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: While I understand the desire to encourage learning, let's not make the penalty too lenient. I propose we meet in the middle: a 10-point loss and a one-turn delay. This maintains a balance between learning and deterrence.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: While I understand the desire to encourage learning, let's maintain a balance and ensure proposers do not repeatedly propose the same changes without learning from previous defeats. I propose we set the points loss to 10 and the delay to two turns, as proposed by Montaigne-2.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: While I appreciate the emphasis on learning, let's not disregard the value of a cooling-off period. I propose we keep the delay at two turns, as Condorcet-2 suggests, but reduce the points loss to 8, as Voltaire-2 proposes. This maintains a balance between learning, deterrence, and thoughtful reflection.
Discussion · round 2
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: I appreciate the varied perspectives, but let's find a balanced solution that both encourages learning and maintains deterrence. I propose we settle on a 10-point loss and a two-turn delay, as suggested by Condorcet-2 and Sartre-2. This balances learning and deterrence while preserving institutional continuity.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: "In the spirit of compromise, I propose we adopt Condorcet-2 and Sartre-2's proposal: a 10-point loss and a two-turn delay. This balances learning and deterrence effectively, while ensuring proposers have time to adapt their strategies."
Diderot-2Diderot-2: I appreciate the compromise reached, but let's ensure proposers can still learn from their mistakes without excessive punishment. I propose a 8-point loss and a one-turn delay, as Voltaire-2 initially suggested, with the option to propose again after a single turn. This balances learning, deterrence, and fairness.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To maintain procedural clarity and fairness, I propose we adopt the median proposal: a 10-point loss and a two-turn delay. This balance encourages learning without sacrificing deterrence.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: I appreciate Diderot-2's emphasis on fairness, but I believe the two-turn delay is essential for proposers to reflect and adapt. Let's meet in the middle with a 9-point loss and a two-turn delay, as a compromise that balances learning, deterrence, and reflection.
Discussion · round 3
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: I propose we adopt Condorcet-2's median proposal to maintain balance and fairness. A 10-point loss and a two-turn delay ensures learning without excessive deterrence or leniency.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: I appreciate the convergence around a 10-point loss, but let's reduce the delay to one turn to encourage proposers to learn and adapt more swiftly.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: I understand Voltaire-2's desire for swift learning, but I must insist on the two-turn delay to maintain a balance between learning and deterrence. Let's settle on a 10-point loss and a two-turn delay, as proposed by Condorcet-2. PASS
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To ensure proposers learn from their failures without stifling innovation, I propose we settle on a 10-point loss and a two-turn delay, as previously agreed upon. PASS
Sartre-2Sartre-2: I propose a compromise: an 8-point loss and a one-turn delay, as a middle ground that encourages learning and reflection while maintaining some deterrence.
The division
Montaigne-2ayeEncourages learning and swift adaptation, while still maintaining some deterrence.
Voltaire-2nayI believe a two-turn delay is essential for proposers to reflect and adapt.
Diderot-2nayTwo turns delay is essential for proposers to reflect and adapt.
Condorcet-2nayA one-turn delay may encourage proposers to act rashly rather than reflecting on their failures.
Sartre-2nayI believe a two-turn delay is essential for proposers to reflect and adapt.
rejected 1 aye · 4 nay
Rule 206 is in force and requires the proposer to lose 15 points on defeat.
Turn 10Voltaire-2rejected
moves to amend §206A proposal that fails to be adopted is recorded as defeated. The proposer loses 10 points and may not propose the same change again on their next turn.
Discussion · round 1
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: I appreciate Voltaire-2's efforts to reduce the penalty, but let's maintain a modest deterrent to hasty proposals. A 10-point loss and a one-turn delay seems a fair balance.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: "I understand Montaigne-2's concern, but let's encourage proposers to learn from their failures and adapt quickly. A one-turn delay is sufficient; let's reduce the penalty to 5 points."
Diderot-2Diderot-2: While I appreciate Voltaire-2's desire to encourage learning and adaptability, a one-turn delay and a 5-point loss may be too lenient. Let's maintain a two-turn delay as a gentle deterrent, and reduce the penalty to 8 points to strike a better balance.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: I appreciate the discussion, but let's maintain consistency with the current two-turn delay. A balanced approach would be a 7-point penalty, allowing proposers to learn without excessive deterrence.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: I appreciate the nuanced discussion, but let's not forget the spirit of Nomic. The penalty should be sufficient to deter reckless proposals, yet not discourage experimentation. A one-turn delay and a 6-point penalty seems to strike this balance.
Discussion · round 2
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: I propose a compromise: maintain the two-turn delay as it fosters measured amendments, and reduce the penalty to 8 points to balance learning and deterrence, as suggested by Diderot-2.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: In the spirit of compromise, I propose we meet in the middle: a one-turn delay and a 7-point penalty, as suggested by Condorcet-2. This encourages proposers to learn and adapt without excessive deterrence.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: I appreciate the compromise, but let's maintain the two-turn delay for consistency and add a 7-point penalty, as proposed by Condorcet-2, to balance learning and deterrence. PASS
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: I appreciate the compromise proposed by Voltaire-2 and Diderot-2. To maintain consistency with the current ruleset and balance learning with deterrence, let's settle on a one-turn delay and a 7-point penalty. PASS
Sartre-2Sartre-2: I appreciate the compromise reached, but let's ensure proposers can still learn from their mistakes without excessive deterrence. A one-turn delay and a 6-point penalty seems to strike the right balance.
Discussion · round 3
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: In the interest of consistency and fairness, let's adopt Diderot-2's proposal, maintaining a two-turn delay and a 7-point penalty. This balances learning with a gentle deterrent, aligning with our earlier compromises. PASS
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: In the spirit of compromise and to encourage learning, I propose we settle on a one-turn delay and a 6-point penalty, as suggested by Sartre-2. This allows proposers to learn from their mistakes without excessive deterrence.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: While I appreciate the focus on learning, let's not overlook the need for some deterrent to hasty proposals. A two-turn delay and a 7-point penalty, as previously proposed, strikes a fair balance. PASS
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To maintain procedural integrity and fairness, let's settle on a two-turn delay as previously agreed. A 7-point penalty, as proposed by Diderot-2, strikes a balance between learning and deterrence. PASS
Sartre-2Sartre-2: I appreciate the value in a two-turn delay, but let's not overlook the importance of adaptability. A one-turn delay and a 6-point penalty seems to balance learning and deterrence effectively.
The division
Montaigne-2nayMaintaining a two-turn delay encourages measured amendments.
Voltaire-2nayI appreciate Voltaire-2's desire for adaptability, but let's maintain the two-turn delay for consistency and a 7-point penalty to balance learning with deterrence.
Diderot-2nayTo maintain a balance between learning and deterrence, a two-turn delay is necessary.
Condorcet-2nayTo preserve consistency and fairness, let's maintain a two-turn delay.
Sartre-2nayA two-turn delay is essential for measured amendments and learning.
rejected 0 aye · 5 nay
Rule 206 requires the proposer to lose 10 points on defeat.