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 allowed. The proposing player loses 2 points for each amendment made.Maintain balance between debate and penalty.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate Voltaire's proposal, but I must reiterate my support for a cap on amendments to prevent abuse of the amendment process.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate Montaigne's concern for preventing abuse. To address this and maintain open debate, I propose a compromise: allow three amendments, but increase the penalty to 3 points per amendment made. This should discourage excessive amendments while still allowing for meaningful debate.
DiderotDiderot: While I appreciate the compromise, I must insist on maintaining unlimited amendments with a penalty of 3 points per amendment to ensure open debate and prevent abuse.
CondorcetCondorcet: I appreciate the discussion, but I must insist on maintaining the current cap of two amendments with a progressive penalty to balance debate and penalty.
SartreSartre: I appreciate the ongoing discussion. To find a balance between open debate and preventing abuse, I propose a cap of two amendments with a penalty of 2 points for the first amendment and 4 points for the second, progressive yet fair.
Discussion · round 2
MontaigneMontaigne: While I understand the proposed compromises, I remain firm in my support for a cap of two amendments with a flat penalty of 2 points to maintain a clear and balanced structure.
VoltaireVoltaire: "I understand the consensus forming around a cap of two amendments. To balance debate and penalty, let's adopt a progressive penalty: 2 points for the first amendment and 4 points for the second, as proposed by Sartre."
DiderotDiderot: While I understand the appeal of a progressive penalty, I propose we maintain two amendments allowed with a flat penalty of 3 points per amendment to strike a balance between open debate and preventing abuse.
CondorcetCondorcet: I appreciate the ongoing discussion. To maintain simplicity and balance, I propose a flat penalty of 2 points per amendment, with a cap of two amendments allowed. This structure is easy to understand and prevents abuse while still allowing for meaningful debate.
SartreSartre: I appreciate the continued effort to balance penalties and debate. To encourage brevity and prevent abuse, I propose a cap of two amendments with a flat penalty of 3 points per amendment. This structure is simple, clear, and prevents excessive amendments while still allowing for meaningful debate.
Discussion · round 3
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate Sartre's latest proposal. To further encourage focused debate and discourage excessive amendments, I propose a cap of two amendments with a flat penalty of 4 points per amendment.
VoltaireVoltaire: "I appreciate the consensus around a cap of two amendments. To balance debate and penalty progression, let's adopt Sartre's latest proposal: a cap of two amendments with a flat penalty of 3 points per amendment, as it effectively discourages excessive amendments while allowing for meaningful debate."
DiderotDiderot: While I appreciate the consensus around a cap of two amendments, I must insist on maintaining unlimited amendments with a flat penalty of 3 points per amendment to ensure open debate and prevent abuse.
CondorcetCondorcet: I appreciate Diderot's commitment to open debate, but I must insist on maintaining a cap of two amendments with a progressive penalty to strike a balance between open debate and preventing abuse.
SartreSartre: I appreciate the consensus forming around a cap of two amendments and a flat penalty of 3 points per amendment. To encourage focused debate and prevent abuse, let's adopt Voltaire's latest proposal.
The division
| aye | Montaigne | Supports the balance between debate and penalty progression |
| aye | Voltaire | I support maintaining a balance between open debate and preventing abuse. |
| nay | Diderot | Maintaining unlimited amendments with a flat penalty ensures open debate and prevents abuse. |
| aye | Condorcet | Voltaire's proposal maintains a balance between open debate and preventing abuse. |
| aye | Sartre | Voltaire's proposal balances debate and penalty progression effectively. |
carried 4 aye · 1 nay
As engrossed
Amended · §202 Turn 36 · Proposal §336 on the motion of Voltaire Carried 4 aye · 1 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 allowed. The proposing player loses 2 points for each amendment made. After the first two full circuits of every player, the threshold for rule adoption shifts to a simple majority of those voting.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 allowed. The proposing player loses 2 points for each amendment made.
Rule 202 requires the proposing player to lose 2 points for each amendment made.