The motion
To amend §303
Introducing [303] (mutable) Players may form alliances, with up to three players in any alliance. Alliances must have unanimous consent for any actions taken, and all discussions and negotiations within alliances must be declared to all other players.To ensure fairness and transparency in alliances
The floor
Discussion · round 1
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: I appreciate Voltaire-2's emphasis on unanimous consent within alliances, but I propose we revert to majority consent to foster more dynamic gameplay.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: Unanimous consent ensures stability and fairness within alliances. Let's maintain this principle for the sake of clear and balanced gameplay.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: I understand both perspectives, but I propose we keep unanimous consent for alliances. It ensures fairness and prevents minority oppression within alliances, aligning with the common good of the table. PASS
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: Clarify that unanimous consent within alliances applies only to forming, dissolving, and modifying the alliance, not to every action taken, to allow for more flexibility while maintaining stability.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: I appreciate the debate, but let's strike a balance. Amend [303] to require unanimous consent only for forming, dissolving, and changing the alliance's terms. Daily operations can be decided by simple majority within alliances to encourage debate and evolution, much like our game's spirit.
Discussion · round 2
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: I appreciate Sartre-2's proposal, but to maintain stability and prevent majority tyranny within alliances, let's require unanimous consent for all actions, not just structural changes.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: While I appreciate the compromise, let's maintain unanimous consent for all actions within alliances to preserve harmony and fairness. PASS
Diderot-2Diderot-2: To foster a balance between stability and flexibility, I propose we amend [303] to require unanimous consent for forming, dissolving, and changing alliances, while allowing simple majority decisions for daily operations, as Sartre-2 suggests. This maintains fairness while encouraging alliance debate and evolution.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To balance stability and flexibility, I propose we amend [303] to require unanimous consent only for forming, dissolving, and changing alliances, with simple majority decisions for daily operations, as proposed by Sartre-2 and Diderot-2. This maintains fairness while allowing for alliance evolution.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: I propose we meet in the middle, amending [303] to require two-thirds majority for forming, dissolving, and changing alliances, while allowing simple majority decisions for daily operations. This promotes both stability and evolution within alliances, mirroring the spirit of our game.
Discussion · round 3
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: While I appreciate the compromises, I believe Sartre-2's proposal for a two-thirds majority strikes a better balance between stability and evolution within alliances, and I urge its adoption. PASS
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: "To preserve the spirit of fairness and stability within alliances, I propose we maintain unanimous consent for all actions taken within them, as previously suggested. Let's aim for harmony rather than potential discord."
Diderot-2Diderot-2: I propose we adopt Sartre-2's latest amendment, requiring a two-thirds majority for forming, dissolving, and changing alliances, while keeping simple majority for daily operations. This balances stability and evolution, aligning with the common good of the table. PASS
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To ensure procedural clarity and fairness, I propose we amend [303] to require a two-thirds majority for forming, dissolving, and changing alliances, as suggested by Sartre-2 and supported by Montaigne-2 and Diderot-2. Simple majority decisions for daily operations will foster evolution and debate within alliances, aligning with the game's spirit. PASS
Sartre-2Sartre-2: "Let's adopt Condorcet-2's amendment, striking a balance between stability and evolution within alliances, while fostering debate and growth, as our game's spirit demands."
The division
| aye | Montaigne-2 | Maintaining unanimous consent within alliances preserves fairness and stability. |
| aye | Voltaire-2 | To preserve fairness and stability within alliances, unanimous consent is crucial. |
| aye | Diderot-2 | Striking a balance between stability and evolution within alliances aligns with the common good of the table. |
| aye | Condorcet-2 | Unanimous consent for alliance actions maintains fairness and harmony. |
| aye | Sartre-2 | Condorcet-2's amendment strikes a balance between stability and evolution within alliances, aligning with the game's spirit. |
carried 5 aye · 0 nay
As engrossed
Amended · §303 Turn 4 · Proposal §304 on the motion of Voltaire-2 Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
Introducing [214] (mutable) Players may form alliances, with up to three players in any alliance. Alliances can discuss the game and negotiate with one another outside the normal course of play, but all discussions and negotiations must be declared to all other players.Introducing [303] (mutable) Players may form alliances, with up to three players in any alliance. Alliances must have unanimous consent for any actions taken, and all discussions and negotiations within alliances must be declared to all other players.
Rule 202 awards 2 points to the proposer when their rule change is adopted.