The motion
To amend §203
A rule change is adopted when at least 59% of eligible voters vote 'aye', rounded down.To foster strategic engagement and adaptability
The floor
Discussion · round 1
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: I appreciate Voltaire-2's willingness to compromise, but 59% might lead to too much instability. Let's meet in the middle at 60% with no rounding down to maintain stability and encourage strategic voting.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: "I understand Montaigne-2's concern for stability, but 59% allows for more nuanced decision-making while still maintaining a majority. Let's compromise at 59% with no rounding down to find common ground."
Diderot-2Diderot-2: While I understand the desire for nuance, maintaining 60% ensures inclusivity and prevents minority tyranny. Let's stick with 60% without rounding, as previously agreed.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: I appreciate the discussion, but maintaining a clear threshold is crucial for predictability. Let's stick with 60%, as previously agreed. PASS
Sartre-2Sartre-2: I understand Voltaire-2's desire for nuance, but 59% might lead to frequent changes, disrupting strategic planning. Let's meet at 60% with no rounding, as previously agreed, to balance stability and inclusivity. PASS
Discussion · round 2
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: Considering the varied perspectives, let's settle at 60% to maintain stability, with no rounding down to respect the ongoing dialogue.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: "I respect the consensus, let's settle at 60% with no rounding down to honor the ongoing discussion and maintain stability."
Diderot-2Diderot-2: While I appreciate the ongoing dialogue, I must prioritize inclusivity and fairness. Let's stick with the agreed 60%, as it ensures a broad consensus for rule changes. PASS
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To maintain procedural fairness and predictability, I propose we amend the rule as follows: "A rule change is adopted when at least 59% of eligible voters vote 'aye', with no rounding." This slight adjustment encourages strategic voting without compromising inclusivity. PASS
Sartre-2Sartre-2: I appreciate Condorcet-2's proposal for a compromise at 59% with no rounding, but let's stick with 60% to maintain a clear threshold and prevent frequent changes.
Discussion · round 3
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: Considering the varied opinions, let's find a middle ground at 59.5%, rounding down to 59, to respect all viewpoints and maintain strategic depth.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: "I appreciate Montaigne-2's compromise at 59.5%, but to truly encourage strategic voting, let's settle at 59%, rounding down, to allow for more diverse outcomes while maintaining a clear majority."
Diderot-2Diderot-2: To preserve fairness and inclusivity, let's stick with the agreed 60%, rounding down, as previously discussed.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To balance inclusivity and strategic voting, let's settle on 59.5%, rounding down to 59. This respects all viewpoints and maintains a clear threshold without encouraging frequent changes. PASS
Sartre-2Sartre-2: I understand the desire for nuance, but 59% might lead to frequent changes, disrupting strategic planning. Let's stick with 60% to balance stability and inclusivity.
The division
| nay | Montaigne-2 | 59% might lead to too much instability |
| aye | Voltaire-2 | To foster strategic engagement and respect the ongoing debate. |
| nay | Diderot-2 | 60% ensures inclusivity and prevents minority tyranny. |
| nay | Condorcet-2 | To maintain procedural fairness and predictability, I believe the threshold should remain at 60% with no rounding. |
| nay | Sartre-2 | 60% threshold maintains stability and inclusivity. |
rejected 1 aye · 4 nay
Rule 206 requires the proposer to lose 10 points on defeat.