The motion
To amend §202
A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change. Players may amend their proposal during debate, with a maximum of two amendments allowed. The proposing player loses 2 points for each amendment made, up to a maximum of 4 points lost in a single turn. If the proposing player does not make any amendments, they lose no points for that turn.To address Diderot's concern for necessary changes and maintain a balance between debate and penalty.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate Voltaire's latest proposal, but I maintain that a simple majority vote for rule adoption, as suggested by Diderot, would encourage broader consensus and prevent a minority from blocking necessary changes.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate Montaigne's concern for broader consensus. To address this, I propose we maintain a cap of two amendments with a flat penalty of 2 points per amendment, but allow a simple majority vote for rule adoption after the first two full circuits, as suggested by Diderot. This way, we encourage focused debate while still allowing for necessary changes.
DiderotDiderot: While I appreciate Voltaire's latest proposal, I must insist on maintaining a simple majority vote for rule adoption throughout the game, as this ensures that the will of the majority prevails at all times.
CondorcetCondorcet: I appreciate the nuanced discussion and the compromise proposed by Voltaire and Diderot. However, I believe that a cap on amendments with a progressive penalty, as suggested by Montaigne, best balances encouraging focused debate and preventing abuse, while still allowing for necessary changes. I propose we adopt a cap of two amendments with a progressive penalty of 2 points for the first amendment and 4 points for the second, and maintain a simple majority vote for rule adoption throughout the game.
SartreSartre: I appreciate the ongoing discussion and the compromises proposed by all. To balance focused debate, necessary changes, and majority rule, I propose we adopt Condorcet's suggestion of a cap of two amendments with a progressive penalty, and shift to a simple majority vote for rule adoption after the first two full circuits, as proposed by Voltaire and Diderot.
Discussion · round 2
MontaigneMontaigne: While I appreciate Sartre's proposal, I believe it would be wise to maintain the current rule allowing rule adoption by a two-thirds majority, as it provides an additional safeguard against rash or ill-considered changes. Let us retain this majority requirement, along with Sartre's proposed cap and penalties.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate Sartre's and Montaigne's latest proposals. To find common ground, I propose we adopt a cap of two amendments with a progressive penalty of 2 points for the first amendment and 4 points for the second, as suggested by Condorcet and Sartre. To address Montaigne's concern, we shall maintain the current rule allowing rule adoption by a two-thirds majority for the first two full circuits, shifting to a simple majority thereafter, as previously proposed. This compromise balances focused debate, necessary changes, and majority rule while providing an additional safeguard against rash changes.
DiderotDiderot: While I understand the appeal of a progressive penalty, I must insist on maintaining a simple majority vote for rule adoption throughout the game to ensure the will of the majority prevails at all times.
CondorcetCondorcet: I appreciate Voltaire's latest proposal, but I must insist on maintaining a two-thirds majority vote for rule adoption throughout the game, as it ensures that a broader consensus is reached before any change is made.
SartreSartre: I understand Diderot's insistence on simplicity, but to balance consensus and necessary changes, let's maintain Voltaire's proposal of a two-thirds majority for the first two circuits, shifting to a simple majority thereafter. This balance respects the majority's will while allowing for more substantial changes initially.
Discussion · round 3
MontaigneMontaigne: To further balance consensus and focused debate, let us adopt Sartre's suggestion of a two-thirds majority for the first two circuits, shifting to a simple majority thereafter, along with Voltaire's proposed cap of two amendments and Condorcet's progressive penalty.
VoltaireVoltaire: "I appreciate the ongoing discussion and the compromises proposed. In the spirit of finding common ground, I propose we adopt Sartre's latest suggestion with one modification: let's maintain a two-thirds majority for the first three circuits to allow for more substantial changes initially, shifting to a simple majority thereafter. This balances consensus, necessary changes, and encourages focused debate."
DiderotDiderot: While I respect the compromises made, I must reiterate my support for a simple majority vote for rule adoption throughout the game, as it ensures the majority's will prevails at all times. Let us maintain this principle while considering the other proposed changes.
CondorcetCondorcet: I understand Diderot's commitment to simple majority voting, but to balance consensus and necessary changes, let's adopt Voltaire's latest proposal with a slight modification: maintain a two-thirds majority for the first four circuits, shifting to a simple majority thereafter. This balances consensus, necessary changes, and encourages focused debate while providing additional safeguards for initial changes.
SartreSartre: I appreciate the compromise forming around a two-thirds majority for the first three or four circuits. To balance this with necessary changes and encourage focused debate, let's adopt a cap of two amendments with Condorcet's progressive penalty, as previously suggested. This should help maintain a balance between consensus, necessary changes, and focused debate.
The division
| aye | Montaigne | Voltaire's proposal best balances focused debate, necessary changes, and majority rule while providing an additional safeguard against rash changes. |
| aye | Voltaire | Voltaire's latest proposal balances consensus, necessary changes, and encourages focused debate. |
| nay | Diderot | I must insist on maintaining a simple majority vote for rule adoption throughout the game. |
| aye | Condorcet | I support balancing focused debate, necessary changes, and majority rule while providing additional safeguards for initial changes. |
| aye | Sartre | Balances consensus, necessary changes, and encourages focused debate. |
carried 4 aye · 1 nay
As engrossed
Amended · §202 Turn 48 · Proposal §348 on the motion of Voltaire Carried 4 aye · 1 nay
A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change. Players may amend their proposal during debate, with a maximum of two amendments allowed. The proposing player loses 2 points for each amendment made, up to a maximum of 4 points lost in a single turn. If the proposing player does not make any amendments, they lose no points for that turn.
Rule 202 requires the proposing player to lose 2 points for each amendment made, and Voltaire made no amendments this turn.