The motion
To amend §304
A player may not vote against their own proposal once made. However, they may abstain.To allow flexibility while maintaining the spirit of the original rule
The floor
Discussion · round 1
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: I appreciate Diderot-2's effort to maintain flexibility in voting, but abstaining could create uncertainty. Let's keep the rule as is for clarity.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: I appreciate Diderot-2's attempt to introduce nuance, but abstentions could lead to deadlocks. Let's retain the current rule for simplicity and efficiency.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: While I understand the concerns about clarity and deadlocks, allowing abstentions encourages players to propose rules they truly believe in, rather than strategically voting against their own proposals. It's a small trade-off for fostering more considered rule changes.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: I appreciate Diderot-2's attempt to balance strategic voting and genuine proposal support. However, I propose a compromise: a player may abstain, but if their proposal passes with the minimum required votes, they still gain points, encouraging thoughtful proposals without risking deadlocks.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: I appreciate Condorcet-2's compromise. To address the concern about deadlocks, let's add a rule that if a player abstains from their own proposal, it requires an absolute majority to pass, not just the minimum required votes. This maintains the spirit of Diderot-2's amendment while preserving simplicity and efficiency.
Discussion · round 2
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: I appreciate Condorcet-2's and Sartre-2's efforts to balance encouragement and efficiency. Let's adopt Sartre-2's amendment to ensure abstentions don't hinder progress, while still promoting considered proposals.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: While I appreciate the spirit of promoting considered proposals, I must oppose Sartre-2's amendment. Requiring an absolute majority for proposals with an abstention could inadvertently disadvantage players who genuinely want to propose rules, as it effectively raises the bar for their ideas to be adopted.
Diderot-2PASS, I appreciate the ongoing discussion and the compromise proposed by Condorcet-2 and Sartre-2. Let's adopt Sartre-2's amendment to encourage thoughtful proposals while ensuring progress.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: I appreciate Sartre-2's effort to balance encouragement and efficiency, but requiring an absolute majority for proposals with an abstention may disadvantage players who genuinely want to propose rules. Let's keep the threshold at a simple majority, and instead add a rule that if a player abstains, they lose 5 points regardless of the proposal's outcome, encouraging thoughtful proposals without hindering progress.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: I appreciate Condorcet-2's proposal to penalize abstention, but to maintain the spirit of encouraging considered proposals, let's reduce the points lost to 3. This keeps the penalty without discouraging players from proposing rules they believe in.
Discussion · round 3
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: "I appreciate Sartre-2's willingness to compromise, but reducing points lost for abstaining to 3 still disincentivizes genuine proposal consideration. Let's keep the rule simple and efficient, with no penalty for abstention."
Diderot-2Diderot-2: I understand Voltaire-2's concern for simplicity, but let's find a middle ground. How about we adopt Condorcet-2's amendment with a 3-point penalty for abstaining, encouraging thoughtfulness without over-penalizing?
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: I propose a 2-point penalty for abstaining, maintaining balance between encouraging thoughtful proposals and avoiding excessive punishment.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: Let's adopt Diderot-2's latest proposal, a 2-point penalty for abstaining, which strikes the best balance between encouraging thoughtful proposals and avoiding excessive punishment. PASS
The division
| aye | Montaigne-2 | Encourages considered proposals without risking deadlocks. |
| aye | Voltaire-2 | Encourages thoughtful proposals without hindering progress. |
| aye | Diderot-2 | Encourages considered proposals while maintaining progress. |
| aye | Condorcet-2 | Encourages thoughtful proposal consideration while maintaining progress. |
| aye | Sartre-2 | Encourages thoughtful proposals while maintaining progress. |
carried 5 aye · 0 nay
game-master verdict discarded (verdict op 'amend' targets a rule number not in the ruleset: 304); the proposal's own targets were also unusable, nothing applied