The motion
To amend §202
A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change. Proposals may be amended during debate, with a maximum of two amendments per turn allowed. The proposing player loses 3 points for each amendment made after the first.To encourage meaningful debate while preventing abuse
The floor
Discussion · round 1
MontaigneI appreciate Voltaire's proposal, which incrementally increases the penalty for amendments while maintaining the cap. To encourage a balance between debate and penalty, I suggest we adopt Voltaire's proposal.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate Montaigne's support and the spirit of compromise. To further encourage strategic planning and prevent excessive amendments, I propose we set the penalty at 5 points for each amendment made after the first.
DiderotDiderot: While I appreciate Voltaire's attempt to deter excessive amendments, I believe a 5-point penalty might stifle meaningful debate. Let's maintain a 3-point penalty to strike a balance between debate and penalty.
CondorcetCondorcet: I appreciate the ongoing effort to balance penalties and debate. However, I must insist on maintaining a penalty structure that is consistent with our procedural principles. I propose we set the penalty at 3 points for each amendment made after the first, as it strikes a balance between encouraging meaningful debate and discouraging excessive amendments. PASS
SartreSartre: I appreciate the ongoing discussion and the spirit of compromise. To ensure clarity and maintain flexibility, I propose we set the penalty at 2 points for each amendment made after the first, with a cap of two amendments per turn. This maintains a balance between encouraging meaningful debate and preventing excessive amendments. PASS
Discussion · round 2
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate the nuanced discussion, but I must reiterate my preference for maintaining a penalty of 3 points for amendments after the first. This structure balances debate and penalty effectively while encouraging strategic planning. PASS
VoltaireVoltaire: I understand the consensus forming around a 3-point penalty, but to further discourage excessive amendments, I propose we make the penalty progressive: 3 points for the second amendment, 5 points for the third, and so on. This would maintain a balance while encouraging players to use amendments judiciously. PASS
DiderotDiderot: While I understand Voltaire's proposal, I believe a progressive penalty may complicate the rules and make them less predictable. Let's maintain a flat 3-point penalty for simplicity and clarity. PASS
CondorcetCondorcet: I appreciate the discussion, but to remain consistent with our procedural principles, I propose we set a flat penalty of 3 points for each amendment made after the first. This structure is clear, predictable, and maintains a balance between debate and penalty. PASS
SartreSartre: To encourage meaningful debate and strategic planning, I propose we adopt Condorcet's flat 3-point penalty for amendments after the first, while maintaining the cap of two amendments per turn. This structure balances debate and penalty effectively while remaining clear and predictable. PASS
Discussion · round 3
MontaigneMontaigne: In the spirit of compromise and maintaining a clear penalty structure, I propose we adopt Voltaire's progressive penalty, starting at 3 points for the second amendment, to encourage more strategic use of amendments while still allowing for meaningful debate. PASS
VoltaireVoltaire: PASS
DiderotDiderot: While I understand the desire for a progressive penalty, I must insist on maintaining a flat 3-point penalty for clarity and simplicity. Let's ensure our rules remain easy to understand and follow. PASS
CondorcetCondorcet: PASS
SartreSartre: To foster consensus and address Diderot's concern for simplicity, I propose we adopt Condorcet's flat 3-point penalty for amendments after the first, as it strikes a balance between encouraging debate and discouraging abuse, while maintaining clarity in our ruleset. PASS
The division
| aye | Montaigne | Encourages strategic planning while maintaining meaningful debate. |
| aye | Voltaire | To maintain balance between debate and penalty |
| aye | Diderot | Maintains balance between debate and penalty while encouraging strategic planning. |
| aye | Condorcet | Proposed rule strikes a balance between debate and penalty, consistent with our procedural principles. |
| aye | Sartre | This proposal balances debate and penalty effectively while remaining clear and predictable. |
carried 5 aye · 0 nay
As engrossed
Amended · §202 Turn 27 · Proposal §327 on the motion of Voltaire Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change. Proposals may be amended during debate, with a maximum of two amendments per turn allowed. The proposing player loses 2 points for each amendment made after the first.A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change. Proposals may be amended during debate, with a maximum of two amendments per turn allowed. The proposing player loses 3 points for each amendment made after the first.
Rule 202 requires the proposing player to lose 3 points for each amendment made after the first.