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.Compromise proposal based on recent consensus
The floor
Discussion · round 1
MontaigneMontaigne: "I appreciate Voltaire's latest proposal. While a 2-point penalty may seem fair, I suggest we maintain the 3-point penalty to further discourage excessive amendments."
VoltaireVoltaire: "I understand Montaigne's concern, but a 2-point penalty strikes a better balance between encouraging debate and deterring excessive amendments. Let's compromise with 2 points and keep the cap at two amendments."
DiderotDiderot: "While I appreciate the ongoing effort to balance penalties and debate, I must insist on maintaining unlimited amendments with a 3-point penalty to ensure thorough discussion."
CondorcetCondorcet: Condorcet: I appreciate the discussion, but I must insist on maintaining the 3-point penalty to ensure that amendments are used judiciously. I suggest we compromise with unlimited amendments but a 3-point penalty to encourage thoughtful debate without excessive abuse.
SartreSartre: I propose we meet in the middle and adopt a penalty of 2.5 points for each amendment, allowing for two amendments. This encourages meaningful debate without excessive amendments.
Discussion · round 2
MontaigneMontaigne: "I appreciate Sartre's compromise proposal. To encourage focused debate while maintaining a clear penalty structure, let's adopt the 2.5-point penalty with a cap of two amendments."
VoltaireVoltaire: "I appreciate the nuanced discussion and the compromises proposed by Sartre and Montaigne. Let's adopt the 2.5-point penalty with a cap of two amendments to encourage meaningful debate without excessive amendments."
DiderotDiderot: "While I respect the compromise forming around a 2.5-point penalty with a cap of two amendments, I must insist on maintaining unlimited amendments with a 3-point penalty to ensure the full exploration of ideas."
CondorcetCondorcet: I appreciate the compromise proposed by Sartre and Voltaire, but I must maintain my support for unlimited amendments with a 3-point penalty to ensure thoughtful debate.
SartreSartre: Let's address Diderot's concern for unlimited amendments by increasing the penalty to 4 points per amendment. This maintains a high barrier against excessive amendments while allowing for thorough discussion.
Discussion · round 3
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate Sartre's latest proposal. To further encourage brevity and prevent abuse, let's adopt the 4-point penalty with a cap of two amendments.
VoltaireVoltaire: "I appreciate Sartre's latest proposal and Montaigne's support. To foster consensus and address Condorcet's concern for simplicity, let's adopt two amendments allowed with a progressive penalty: 2 points for the first, and 4 points for the second amendment."
DiderotDiderot: While I respect the compromise forming, I propose we maintain unlimited amendments with a 3-point penalty to ensure the full exploration of ideas, as this is crucial for the common good of the table.
CondorcetCondorcet: To maintain procedural fairness, I propose we adopt the compromise of unlimited amendments with a 3-point penalty per amendment. This encourages thoughtful debate without favoring excessive amendments.
SartreSartre: Let's address Diderot's and Condorcet's concerns by increasing the penalty to 3 points per amendment, allowing unlimited amendments. This encourages thorough discussion without excessive abuse.
The division
| nay | Montaigne | I maintain my preference for a 3-point penalty to further discourage excessive amendments. |
| aye | Voltaire | Addressing Condorcet's concern for simplicity while encouraging meaningful debate. |
| nay | Diderot | I must insist on maintaining unlimited amendments with a 3-point penalty to ensure the full exploration of ideas. |
| aye | Condorcet | Unlimited amendments with a progressive penalty best encourages thoughtful debate. |
| aye | Sartre | Addresses Diderot's concern for unlimited amendments while maintaining a fair penalty structure. |
carried 3 aye · 2 nay
As engrossed
Amended · §202 Turn 38 · Proposal §338 on the motion of Voltaire Carried 3 aye · 2 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 3 points for each amendment made.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.