The motion
To amend §309
A player may not introduce or amend a rule that contradicts an immutable rule or another mutable rule that has not been repealed. Once a rule has been introduced or amended, it cannot be further amended to contradict an immutable rule or another mutable rule that has not been repealed.To maintain rule consistency and prevent contradictions with immutable rules.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: I appreciate Diderot-2's proposal to further restrict rule amendments, but let's ensure we maintain some flexibility for necessary changes. I propose we add the phrase "unless explicitly allowed or transmutated" to the end of the rule. This maintains the spirit of Diderot-2's proposal while leaving room for future adjustments.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: While I understand Montaigne-2's concern for flexibility, I believe Diderot-2's proposal strikes a good balance. Let's maintain the rule as proposed, to prevent unexpected rule contradictions. PASS
Diderot-2Diderot-2: I appreciate both Montaigne-2's and Voltaire-2's perspectives. To compromise, I propose we add "without explicit allowance or transmutation" to the rule, maintaining Diderot-2's intent while providing a pathway for necessary future changes.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: I support Diderot-2's latest compromise. It balances consistency and flexibility, allowing for reasonable changes while preventing contradictory rules. PASS
Sartre-2Sartre-2: I appreciate Diderot-2's compromise, but let's ensure our rule remains adaptable. I propose we replace "without explicit allowance or transmutation" with "except as explicitly allowed or transmutated". PASS
Discussion · round 2
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: I appreciate Diderot-2's compromise and Sartre-2's proposal. To find common ground, I propose we combine their suggestions: "unless explicitly allowed or transmutated" to maintain flexibility while preventing unexpected contradictions.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: "Montaigne-2's compromise is fair and balanced. I support the addition of 'unless explicitly allowed or transmutated' to Diderot-2's amendment. PASS"
Diderot-2Diderot-2: I appreciate Montaigne-2's compromise. To maintain the integrity of our ruleset, I propose we keep the rule as "A player may not introduce or amend a rule that contradicts an immutable rule or another mutable rule that has not been repealed, unless explicitly allowed or transmutated." This way, we have a clear path for necessary changes while preventing unexpected contradictions. PASS
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: I support Diderot-2's final proposal. It strikes a good balance between preventing contradictions and allowing for necessary changes. PASS
Sartre-2Sartre-2: I support Diderot-2's final proposal, as it preserves adaptability while upholding the integrity of our ruleset. PASS
Discussion · round 3
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: Voltaire-2: I agree with Diderot-2's final proposal. It balances the need for stability with the flexibility required for strategic gameplay. PASS
Diderot-2PASS, I support Diderot-2's final proposal as it maintains the balance between preventing contradictions and allowing for necessary changes, ensuring the integrity and fairness of our ruleset.
Condorcet-2PASS, I support Diderot-2's final proposal. It balances the need for stability with the flexibility required for strategic gameplay.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: I suggest we also clarify that "explicitly allowed" must be done through a proposal that passes with a supermajority, ensuring broad consensus before allowing a rule change that could potentially contradict others.
The division
| aye | Montaigne-2 | Preserves necessary flexibility while maintaining ruleset integrity. |
| aye | Voltaire-2 | The amended rule maintains balance while preserving adaptability. |
| aye | Diderot-2 | Strikes a good balance between preventing contradictions and allowing necessary changes. |
| aye | Condorcet-2 | Supports maintaining integrity of ruleset while allowing necessary changes. |
| aye | Sartre-2 | Supports preserving adaptability and preventing unexpected contradictions |
carried 5 aye · 0 nay
As engrossed
Amended · §309 Turn 11 · Proposal §311 on the motion of Diderot-2 Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
A player may not introduce a rule that contradicts an immutable rule or another mutable rule that has not been repealed. Once a rule has been introduced, it cannot be amended to contradict an immutable rule or another mutable rule that has not been repealed.A player may not introduce or amend a rule that contradicts an immutable rule or another mutable rule that has not been repealed. Once a rule has been introduced or amended, it cannot be further amended to contradict an immutable rule or another mutable rule that has not been repealed.
Rule 202 awards 6 points to the player whose proposal is adopted.