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 three amendments allowed. The proposing player loses 3 points for each amendment made, up to a maximum of 9 points lost in a single turn. If the proposing player does not make any amendments, they lose no points for that turn.To encourage more focused debate and allow for necessary changes
The floor
Discussion · round 1
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate Diderot's latest proposal, but I believe a cap of two amendments with a progressive penalty best balances focus, debate, and prevention of abuse.
VoltaireVoltaire: "I appreciate Diderot's suggestion to increase the cap and penalty for amendments. To maintain a balance between encouraging debate and preventing abuse, let's consider a cap of three amendments with a penalty of 3 points per amendment, up to a maximum of 9 points lost in a single turn."
DiderotDiderot: While I appreciate Montaigne's and Voltaire's concerns, I maintain that unlimited amendments with a progressive penalty of 3 points per amendment best encourages thorough discussion and necessary changes. Let us consider a simple majority vote for adoption to maintain balance.
CondorcetCondorcet: I appreciate the ongoing discussion, but I must insist on maintaining a cap on amendments to prevent abuse. I propose a compromise: a cap of three amendments with a progressive penalty of 2 points per amendment, up to a maximum of 6 points lost in a single turn. This maintains focus, encourages debate, and prevents excessive penalties.
SartreSartre: I appreciate Diderot's and Condorcet's concerns for thorough discussion, but I believe Voltaire's proposal best balances encouragement of debate with prevention of abuse. Let's adopt a cap of three amendments with a penalty of 3 points per amendment, up to a maximum of 9 points lost in a single turn. This maintains a progressive penalty while limiting excessive changes in a single turn.
Discussion · round 2
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate the nuanced discussion. To further encourage focused debate and discourage excessive changes, let's adopt Condorcet's compromise: a cap of three amendments with a progressive penalty of 2 points per amendment, up to a maximum of 6 points lost in a single turn. This maintains balance, encourages debate, and prevents abuse more effectively than other proposed caps.
VoltaireVoltaire: "I appreciate Montaigne's latest proposal and the consensus forming around a cap of three amendments. To maintain balance and address Diderot's concern for necessary changes, let's adopt a cap of four amendments with a penalty of 3 points per amendment, up to a maximum of 12 points lost in a single turn."
DiderotDiderot: While I respect the consensus forming, I must reiterate my support for a simple majority vote for adoption to maintain balance and encourage necessary changes.
CondorcetCondorcet: I understand Diderot's concern for a simple majority vote, but I believe a supermajority is necessary to prevent hasty decisions and maintain stability. A cap of three amendments with a progressive penalty of 2 points per amendment, as I proposed, balances focus, debate, and prevention of abuse while ensuring that significant changes require broader consensus.
SartreSartre: Let's adopt Condorcet's proposal of a cap of three amendments with a progressive penalty of 2 points per amendment, requiring a supermajority for adoption. This balances focus, debate, and stability while maintaining a fair voting threshold.
Discussion · round 3
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate the consensus around a cap of three amendments. To find common ground with Diderot's concern for necessary changes, let's adopt a cap of three amendments with a penalty of 2 points per amendment for the first two, and 3 points for the third, requiring a two-thirds majority for adoption. This maintains balance, encourages thorough discussion, and prevents hasty decisions.
VoltaireVoltaire: "I appreciate Montaigne's latest proposal and the spirit of compromise. However, to maintain a balance between encouraging debate and preventing excessive changes, let's adopt a cap of four amendments with a penalty of 3 points per amendment, up to a maximum of 12 points lost in a single turn, still requiring a two-thirds majority for adoption."
DiderotDiderot: While I appreciate the ongoing discussion, I must insist on maintaining unlimited amendments with a progressive penalty of 3 points per amendment. To balance this with stability, let us adopt a simple majority vote for adoption, as it encourages thorough discussion while preventing hasty decisions.
CondorcetCondorcet: To maintain clarity and balance, let's revert to a cap of three amendments with a progressive penalty of 2 points per amendment, requiring a supermajority for adoption, as previously proposed. This provides a clear limit on changes while encouraging thorough discussion.
SartreSartre: Let's meet in the middle and adopt a cap of three amendments with a penalty of 2 points per amendment for the first two, and 3 points for the third, requiring a simple majority for adoption. This encourages thorough discussion while preventing excessive changes and maintains fairness in voting.
The division
| nay | Montaigne | I believe a cap of three amendments with a progressive penalty best balances focus, debate, and prevention of abuse. |
| aye | Voltaire | Compromise proposal that balances focus, debate, and voting threshold. |
| nay | Diderot | I prefer a simple majority vote for adoption. |
| aye | Condorcet | A cap on amendments prevents excessive changes and encourages focused debate. |
| aye | Sartre | Encourages thorough discussion while preventing excessive changes. |
carried 3 aye · 2 nay
As engrossed
Amended · §202 Turn 50 · Proposal §350 on the motion of Diderot Carried 3 aye · 2 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.A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change. Players may amend their proposal during debate, with a maximum of three amendments allowed. The proposing player loses 3 points for each amendment made, up to a maximum of 9 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 3 points for making an amendment.