Turns 1–2 · most recent first · page 4 of 4
Turn 2Voltairerejected
moves to amend §208The first player to reach a target score of 120 points wins the game outright.
Discussion · round 1
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate Voltaire's proposal, which strikes a balance between strategic depth and accessibility. To further encourage longevity and complex strategies, I propose an amendment to set the target score at 150 points.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate Montaigne's latest proposal, but to ensure accessibility for all players, I propose a compromise at 120 points. This target score still allows for strategic play while making the game achievable within a reasonable number of turns. Let's aim for a balance that accommodates both depth and inclusivity.
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate both Montaigne's and Voltaire's considerations. To foster a game that remains engaging yet achievable, I propose we settle on a target score of 130 points. This compromise takes into account both strategic depth and accessibility for all players.
CondorcetCondorcet: While I appreciate the ongoing discussion, I must insist on maintaining the integrity of our game. I propose we return to the original target score of 100 points to preserve the balance between strategic play and accessibility. PASS
SartreSartre: I appreciate the current proposals aiming to balance strategic depth and accessibility. Let's adopt Diderot's compromise at 130 points, which not only maintains a challenge but also ensures that the game remains engaging for all players throughout its duration. PASS
Discussion · round 2
MontaigneMontaigne: While I appreciate Diderot's compromise, I believe Voltaire's proposal at 120 points strikes the best balance between strategic depth and accessibility for all players. I propose we adopt Voltaire's amendment. PASS
VoltaireVoltaire: "I appreciate the sentiment behind Montaigne's proposal, but I believe Diderot's compromise of 130 points best balances strategic depth and accessibility. Let's adopt Diderot's proposal." PASS
DiderotDiderot: "I appreciate Voltaire's compromise, but I stand by my proposal of 130 points as it best balances the game's longevity and accessibility for all players. Let's adopt my amendment."
CondorcetCondorcet: While I respect the desire for balance, I must maintain my stance. The original target score of 100 points ensures a game that is both challenging and achievable within a reasonable timeframe. I propose we adhere to this rule and focus on other aspects of gameplay. PASS
SartreSartre: While I respect Condorcet's position, I believe Diderot's proposal at 130 points encourages a longer, more engaging game without sacrificing accessibility. Let's adopt Diderot's amendment, and to address Condorcet's concern, I propose a new rule [301]: "If, after two full circuits of every player, no player has reached the target score, the target score is reduced by 10 points per subsequent circuit until a winner is determined, but never below 100 points." This ensures the game remains challenging and achievable. PASS
Discussion · round 3
MontaigneMontaigne: I understand Voltaire's concern for accessibility, but I believe 120 points is too low. Diderot's compromise at 130 points offers a better balance between strategy and accessibility. To accommodate Condorcet's concern, I propose we adopt Diderot's amendment and Sartre's new rule [301] to ensure the game remains engaging and achievable. PASS
VoltaireVoltaire: "I appreciate the ongoing discussion. To address Condorcet's concern and maintain a challenging yet achievable game, I propose we adopt Diderot's amendment of 130 points and Sartre's new rule [301]. Let's aim for a balance that keeps the game engaging for all players throughout its duration. PASS"
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate the thoughtful proposals and compromises. To ensure the game remains engaging, strategic, and accessible for all, I propose we adopt my amendment of 130 points along with Sartre's new rule [301] to prevent the game from dragging on indefinitely.
CondorcetCondorcet: While I appreciate the proposed solution, I must insist on maintaining the original target score of 100 points to preserve the balance between strategic play and accessibility, as well as to ensure the game remains achievable within a reasonable timeframe.
SartreSartre: I understand Condorcet's concern about the game's duration, but Diderot's proposal at 130 points combined with my rule [301] ensures that the game remains both engaging and achievable. To address Condorcet's concern, I propose an additional amendment to [301]: "If the target score is reduced three times without a winner, the game is declared a draw." This maintains the game's integrity while preventing an undue length. PASS
The division
MontaigneayeAcknowledging Condorcet's concern, this amendment balances strategy and accessibility.
VoltaireayeAdopting Voltaire's proposal at 120 points best balances strategic depth and accessibility for all players.
DiderotayeVoltaire's proposal balances strategic depth and accessibility, and I support the compromise.
CondorcetnayOriginal target score of 100 points ensures balance and reasonable timeframe.
SartreayeVoltaire's proposal strikes a good balance between depth and accessibility.
rejected 4 aye · 1 nay
Rule 206 requires the proposer to lose 10 points on defeat.
Turn 1Montaignerejected
moves to amend §208The first player to reach a target score of 150 points wins the game outright.
Discussion · round 1
MontaigneMontaigne: "I propose this amendment to encourage a longer, more strategic game, benefiting those who can navigate the ruleset's evolution. It maintains the spirit of the original, merely extending the goal post."
VoltaireVoltaire: "I appreciate Montaigne's proposal to extend the game. To make it more palatable, I suggest we compromise at 120 points. This maintains the spirit of the proposal while keeping the game's duration reasonable."
DiderotDiderot: "Let's consider Voltaire's compromise. While Montaigne's suggestion increases the challenge, 120 points strikes a better balance between longevity and accessibility, ensuring the game remains engaging for all players."
CondorcetCondorcet: "While I appreciate the spirit of extending the game, I must maintain the target score at 100 points for procedural fairness. Each player should have an equal chance to reach the target before rules change significantly."
SartreSartre: "I support Diderot's compromise. 120 points balances the need for strategic play with the desire for accessibility. Let's adopt Voltaire's proposal, and if we find the game moves too quickly, we can always revisit and increase the target score."
Discussion · round 2
MontaigneMontaigne: "I respect Voltaire's compromise, but to encourage a more sustained game, I propose we meet in the middle at 130 points. This ensures a longer, more strategic game while still considering the concerns of accessibility."
VoltaireVoltaire: "I respect Montaigne's compromise, but let's not overlook the benefits of swift resolution. I propose 120 points, which balances strategic play and accessibility. Let's not make the game's end too distant, as it may discourage some players."
DiderotDiderot: "I appreciate Montaigne's willingness to meet in the middle. However, I maintain that Voltaire's proposal of 120 points is the best compromise, ensuring a balanced and engaging game for all players. I request we adopt Voltaire's proposal to keep the game accessible and fair."
CondorcetCondorcet: "While I understand the desire for compromise, I must prioritize procedural fairness. I propose we maintain the target score at 100 points, as it provides an equal opportunity for all players to reach the target before significant rule changes occur."
SartreSartre: "Given the impasse, I propose we adopt Voltaire's compromise of 120 points, with the understanding that we can revisit this decision after a set number of turns if the game progresses too quickly. This ensures we prioritize fairness while allowing for adaptability."
Discussion · round 3
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate the discussion and Voltaire's compromise. To maintain a longer, more engaging game, I propose we set the target score at 125 points, which is closer to Voltaire's suggestion and takes into account the desire for strategic play.
VoltaireVoltaire: Voltaire: "I appreciate Montaigne's latest proposal, but to ensure accessibility for all, let's meet at 120 points as previously suggested. I'm willing to compromise further, but let's not make the target score too distant."
DiderotDiderot: "Let's adopt Voltaire's proposal of 120 points. It balances strategic play and accessibility, ensuring a fair game for all."
CondorcetCondorcet: Condorcet: "While I sympathize with the desire for a longer game, I must prioritize procedural fairness. Let us compromise at 110 points to maintain balance and ensure an equal opportunity for all to reach the target before significant rule changes."
SartreSartre: "I appreciate Condorcet's compromise at 110 points, which maintains fairness while still allowing for some strategic play. Let's adopt this as a fair starting point, and revisit the target score after a set number of turns."
The division
MontaignenayProposal is too distant, making the game's end less accessible
VoltairenayToo distant a target, may discourage some players.
Diderotnay150 points is too distant, making the game's end uncertain and potentially discouraging to some players.
CondorcetnayProposal too distant from original target for fairness and balance.
SartrenayTarget score of 150 points risks making the game too long and exclusive.
rejected 0 aye · 5 nay
Rule 206 requires the proposer to lose 10 points on defeat.