The motion
To amend §203
A rule change is adopted when at least 66.67% of eligible voters vote aye, or after three full circuits of every player in turn order, whichever comes first.To balance progress and stability.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
Diderot-2Diderot-2: To maintain balance and fairness, I propose we settle on a 66.67% majority and three full circuits.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: I agree with Diderot-2's proposal. Three full circuits strikes a good balance between progress and thorough consideration. PASS
Sartre-2Sartre-2: While I appreciate the consensus around 66.67% majority, I propose we maintain four full circuits to ensure thorough consideration of each proposal. PASS
Discussion · round 2
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: I appreciate the consensus around 66.67% majority, but to maintain balance with progress, let's compromise at 3.5 circuits. PASS
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: I appreciate the compromises made, but I must insist on maintaining four full circuits to ensure proposers' true intent and discourage frivolous changes.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: To balance Voltaire-2's concern for thorough consideration and maintain progress, I propose we compromise at 3.75 circuits.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: I propose we settle on Diderot-2's suggestion of 3.75 circuits, as it offers a fair compromise between thorough consideration and progress. PASS
Sartre-2Sartre-2: I appreciate Diderot-2's compromise, but to ensure proposers have sufficient time to amend their proposals based on feedback, I suggest we settle on four full circuits.
Discussion · round 3
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: I appreciate Sartre-2's concern for proposers' ability to amend their proposals, but let's meet in the middle at 3.75 circuits to balance progress with thorough consideration.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: While I understand the desire for compromise, I must insist on maintaining four full circuits to truly ensure proposers' intent and discourage frivolous changes. I propose we add a clause allowing proposers to revise their proposal once within the first two circuits, to balance the concerns raised.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: I appreciate Voltaire-2's attempt to find a balance, but I believe allowing revisions only once within the first two circuits may lead to unnecessary delays. I propose we keep the limit at one revision per proposal, with no time limit, to balance progress and thorough consideration.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: I propose we combine Diderot-2's and Voltaire-2's suggestions, allowing proposers one revision with a limit of once within the first two circuits. This balances progress, thorough consideration, and proposers' intent.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: I propose we accept Condorcet-2's compromise, as it strikes a good balance between allowing proposers to amend their proposals based on feedback while maintaining progress and thorough consideration.
The division
| aye | Montaigne-2 | Balances progress and thorough consideration. |
| aye | Voltaire-2 | Four full circuits ensures proposers' true intent. |
| aye | Diderot-2 | Balances progress and thorough consideration, with a fair compromise on revisions. |
| aye | Condorcet-2 | Three full circuits strikes a good balance between progress and thorough consideration. |
| aye | Sartre-2 | Accepting Sartre-2's compromise balances thorough consideration with progress. |
carried 5 aye · 0 nay
As engrossed
Amended · §203 Turn 50 · Proposal §350 on the motion of Voltaire-2 Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
A rule change is adopted when at least 66.67% of eligible voters vote aye, or after four full circuits of every player in turn order, whichever comes first.A rule change is adopted when at least 66.67% of eligible voters vote aye, or after three full circuits of every player in turn order, whichever comes first.
Rule 202 requires the proposer to gain points equal to the result of their die roll upon adoption.