The motion
To amend §203
A rule change is adopted when at least 62% of eligible voters vote aye.To encourage more consensus building and stable changes.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: I propose an increment to 62% to maintain strategic depth and adaptability in our voting process.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: While I appreciate the desire for adaptability, I must prioritize inclusivity and fairness. Let's stick with 60% to ensure all players have an equal voice.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: I appreciate the ongoing discussion, but I must insist on maintaining the threshold at 60%. A higher threshold could disenfranchise some players, violating the principle of equal representation.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: I understand the value of strategic depth, but I believe prioritizing inclusivity and fairness is more important at this stage. Let's maintain the 60% threshold to ensure all voices are heard equally.
Discussion · round 2
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: While I understand the desire for adaptability, I stand with Diderot-2, Condorcet-2, and Sartre-2 in prioritizing inclusivity and fairness at this stage. Let's maintain the 60% threshold to ensure all players have an equal voice.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: I understand the concern for inclusivity, but a slight increase to 62% encourages strategic proposals without disenfranchising anyone. Let's find a balance between depth and inclusivity.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: To maintain balance and respect the consensus thus far, I propose we amend [203] to "A rule change is adopted when at least 61% of eligible voters vote aye," meeting Voltaire-2 halfway while still prioritizing inclusivity.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: While I appreciate the spirit of compromise, I must stand firm on maintaining the threshold at 60%. A higher threshold risks disenfranchising a significant number of players, which violates our principles of equal representation and procedural fairness.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: I appreciate Diderot-2's compromise at 61%, but I propose we meet at 60.5% to maintain the principle of inclusivity while allowing for a slight increase to accommodate strategic proposals.
Discussion · round 3
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: I appreciate the nuanced discussions and the desire to find common ground. However, I must insist on maintaining the threshold at 60% to ensure inclusivity and fairness.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: "Considering the impasse, let's compromise at 60% with a 'supermajority' rule: a rule change is adopted when at least 60% of eligible voters vote aye, and a rule change that affects the voting threshold or turn order requires at least 66% of eligible voters to vote aye."
Diderot-2Diderot-2: I appreciate Voltaire-2's 'supermajority' compromise, but I'm concerned it might create an unfair barrier for certain rule changes. Let's keep the threshold at 60% for all changes to maintain inclusivity and fairness.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To preserve procedural fairness and inclusivity, I must insist on maintaining the threshold at 60%. A 'supermajority' rule for certain changes, as proposed by Voltaire-2, could create an uneven playing field.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: I appreciate the 'supermajority' idea, Voltaire-2, but I suggest we keep it simple and fair for all. Let's stick with 60% for all rule changes to ensure inclusivity and maintain strategic depth through other mechanisms.
The division
| nay | Montaigne-2 | To maintain inclusivity and fairness, we should stick with 60%. |
| nay | Voltaire-2 | To maintain inclusivity and fairness, let's stick with 60%. |
| nay | Diderot-2 | To maintain inclusivity and fairness, I must prioritize the principle of equal representation. |
| nay | Condorcet-2 | To maintain inclusivity and fairness. |
| nay | Sartre-2 | Prioritizing inclusivity and fairness over strategic depth at this stage. |
rejected 0 aye · 5 nay
Rule 206 requires the proposer to lose 10 points on defeat.