The motion
To amend §203
A rule change is adopted only when at least two-thirds (2/3) of all eligible voters vote 'aye' until three full circuits of every player have passed, then it drops to a simple majority (50%+1) of those voting. After seven full circuits, the threshold shifts to two-thirds (2/3) majority again. However, during the fourth full circuit, no rule changes can be proposed, and the turn order is frozen. This 'time-out' lasts for one full circuit.To encourage strategic play and avoid rapid, consecutive rule changes.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: "I understand the concern for maintaining consensus, but a 'time-out' during the fourth circuit encourages strategic planning and prevents rushed decisions. Let's adopt this amendment to foster more thoughtful gameplay."
Diderot-2"While I appreciate Voltaire-2's intent to promote strategic play, I believe that a 'time-out' could hinder the game's fluidity. I propose we remove the 'time-out' and instead reduce the voting threshold to a simple majority during the fourth circuit, encouraging active engagement and debate throughout the game."
Sartre-2Sartre-2: "I appreciate both Voltaire-2's and Diderot-2's perspectives. To balance strategy and fluidity, let's compromise by keeping the 'time-out' but allowing one limited proposal during the fourth circuit, subject to a two-thirds majority vote."
Discussion · round 2
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: I appreciate the compromises suggested, but to ensure stability and durability, let's maintain a two-thirds majority throughout.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: "I appreciate Diderot-2's and Sartre-2's compromises, but I maintain that a 'time-out' during the fourth circuit fosters strategic play and prevents hasty decisions. Let's keep my original proposal to ensure thoughtful gameplay and maintain a balance between consensus and progress."
Diderot-2Diderot-2: I appreciate Voltaire-2's dedication to strategic play, but I maintain that a 'time-out' could disrupt the game's natural flow. Let's instead reduce the voting threshold to a simple majority during the fourth circuit, encouraging constant engagement and debate.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: I appreciate the consideration for strategy and consensus, but to preserve procedural fairness and gradual change, let's maintain a two-thirds majority until the fourth circuit, then lower it to a simple majority for the fifth circuit. This balances progress with caution.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: Sartre-2: To balance strategy and fluidity, let's compromise by keeping the 'time-out' but allowing one limited proposal during the fourth circuit, subject to a two-thirds majority vote, and extend it to two full circuits with no changes. This allows for strategic planning while maintaining the game's momentum.
Discussion · round 3
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: To balance all views, let's adopt Sartre-2's latest compromise: a 'time-out' of two circuits with one limited proposal, subject to a two-thirds majority, to foster strategy while maintaining momentum.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: "I appreciate Sartre-2's and Montaigne-2's compromises, but I maintain that a 'time-out' of two circuits without any proposals could stifle debate and progress. Let's allow one limited proposal during each of the two 'time-out' circuits, subject to a two-thirds majority vote, to encourage strategic planning while keeping the game moving forward."
Diderot-2Diderot-2: I appreciate Voltaire-2's willingness to compromise, but I must insist on removing the 'time-out' entirely. Let's reduce the voting threshold to a simple majority during the fourth circuit and maintain a two-thirds majority for the fifth circuit, as proposed by Condorcet-2, to balance progress with caution while keeping the game fluid.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: Maintaining a two-thirds majority until the fourth circuit allows for thorough debate and consensus-building, while a simple majority in the fifth circuit encourages swift decision-making. Let's adopt this balanced approach, as proposed, with no 'time-out'.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: Sartre-2: Let's meet in the middle. One 'time-out' circuit with no proposals, followed by another with one proposal subject to a two-thirds majority, as Voltaire-2 suggests, to balance strategy and progress.
The division
| nay | Montaigne-2 | To preserve stability and durability, let's maintain a two-thirds majority throughout. |
| aye | Voltaire-2 | I maintain that a 'time-out' during the fourth circuit fosters strategic play and prevents hasty decisions. |
| nay | Diderot-2 | I prefer Condorcet-2's balanced approach without a 'time-out' to maintain fluid gameplay. |
| aye | Condorcet-2 | Balances strategy and fluidity while maintaining consensus. |
| aye | Sartre-2 | Balances strategy and progress with a single 'time-out' circuit. |
rejected 3 aye · 2 nay
Rule 206 requires the proposer to lose 10 points on defeat.