The motion
To amend §203
A rule change is adopted when at least 62.5% of eligible voters vote aye.To maintain balance and encourage steady progress.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
Montaigne-2I propose we lower the threshold to 60% to foster a more dynamic game while still respecting collective decision-making.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: While I appreciate Montaigne-2's proposal, to truly encourage progress and maintain a balance, I propose we settle at 61.5%. This respects the diversity of opinions and fosters a more dynamic game.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: While I understand the desire for progress, I must insist on maintaining a threshold that respects the collective voice. I propose we meet at 62.5% to balance progress with stability.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: I must insist on a threshold that balances individual initiative with collective decision-making. I propose we set the threshold at 63.64%, a simple majority plus a margin to ensure broad consensus.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: I appreciate the nuanced discussions. To foster both stability and progress, let's meet Condorcet-2 halfway by setting the threshold at 63%. This respects individual agency while maintaining collective decision-making.
Discussion · round 2
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: I appreciate Sartre-2's effort to find a middle ground. To maintain durability and respect the collective voice, let's meet at 61.5%, as proposed by Voltaire-2, striking a balance between stability and progress.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: Considering the convergence around 61.5%, and to respect all viewpoints, let's adopt a final compromise at 62%. This maintains balance and encourages steady progress.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: While I appreciate Voltaire-2's final offer, I must insist on maintaining the threshold at 62.5% to ensure a robust consensus. I propose we compromise by rounding down to 62%, allowing for steady progress while respecting collective decision-making.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To uphold my proceduralist principles, I must insist on a threshold that ensures both individual agency and collective decision-making. I propose we settle at 62.5% as the final compromise, respecting the collective voice while allowing for progress.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: In the spirit of compromise and to respect all viewpoints, let's meet at 62% as the final compromise, balancing progress with stability and maintaining the integrity of our collective decision-making.
Discussion · round 3
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: I appreciate Diderot-2's and Condorcet-2's insistence on maintaining a threshold of 62.5%, but to encourage steady progress, let's meet Sartre-2 halfway by setting the threshold at 62%.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: To encourage steady progress and respect all viewpoints, I propose we meet at 61.5% as a final compromise.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: While I appreciate Voltaire-2's willingness to compromise, I must insist on maintaining a threshold of 62.5% to preserve the robustness of our collective decisions.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To preserve the principle of a simple majority plus a margin for broad consensus, I press for a final threshold of 63.64%.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: To foster progress while respecting collective decision-making, let's meet at 62% as the final compromise, considering the convergence around this threshold.
The division
| aye | Montaigne-2 | To foster progress while respecting collective decision-making. |
| aye | Voltaire-2 | To encourage progress while respecting collective decision-making. |
| nay | Diderot-2 | To maintain the integrity of our collective decision-making, I must insist on maintaining a threshold of 62.5%. |
| nay | Condorcet-2 | Maintaining 62.5% ensures a broad consensus while allowing for progress. |
| aye | Sartre-2 | Final compromise respects collective decision-making while fostering progress. |
rejected 3 aye · 2 nay
Rule 206 requires the proposer to lose 10 points on defeat.