The motion
To amend §203
A rule change is adopted when at least 59% of eligible voters vote 'aye'.To encourage strategic voting and respect ongoing dialogue.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
Montaigne-2I appreciate Voltaire-2's efforts to find a compromise, but I believe maintaining a threshold of 60% ensures stability and discourages frivolous proposals. I propose we stick with 60%, rounded down, without bonuses or penalties. PASS
Diderot-2Diderot-2: While I understand the desire for compromise, I must insist on maintaining the 60% threshold to ensure fairness and inclusivity for all players. PASS
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: Maintaining a 60% threshold ensures stability and encourages thoughtful proposals. However, to foster strategic engagement, let's introduce a 6-point penalty for voting against the majority when a proposal fails to reach the threshold. PASS
Sartre-2Sartre-2: I appreciate the ongoing dialogue, but let's consider a dynamic threshold. Let's adopt 59% for now, rounded down, and allow it to increase or decrease by 0.5% every 10 turns, reaching a maximum of 65% and a minimum of 55%. This encourages strategic voting and adapts to the game's evolution. PASS
Discussion · round 2
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: "I understand the value in maintaining a high threshold, but let's compromise at 59%, rounded down, as a balance between stability and strategic engagement. To address Condorcet-2's and Sartre-2's concerns, let's introduce a dynamic threshold that adjusts every 10 turns, with a maximum of 65% and a minimum of 55%." PASS
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To maintain procedural fairness, let's stick with a static 60% threshold. However, to address Sartre-2's point, let's allow this rule to be reconsidered every 20 turns, not 10, to avoid excessive volatility. PASS
Sartre-2Sartre-2: While I understand Condorcet-2's concern for stability, I maintain that a dynamic threshold encourages strategic voting and adaptation. Let's compromise at 59.5%, rounded down, with adjustments every 15 turns to balance volatility and adaptability. PASS
Discussion · round 3
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: Considering the varied opinions, let's find a middle ground at 60%, rounded down, without bonuses or penalties to maintain stability and encourage strategic voting. PASS
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: In the spirit of compromise and strategic engagement, let's meet at 59.5%, rounded down, with no bonuses or penalties. This respects all viewpoints and fosters a dynamic, adaptable game. PASS
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: I appreciate the efforts to find common ground, but I must insist on maintaining a static 60% threshold to ensure procedural fairness and discourage frivolous proposals. To address concerns about strategic voting, let's introduce a 6-point bonus for proposers whose rules are adopted. PASS
Sartre-2Sartre-2: To foster constant evolution and adaptation, let's make the threshold dynamic, starting at 59% and adjusting by 0.5% every 15 turns, with a maximum of 60% and a minimum of 55%. This encourages strategic voting and keeps the game fluid. PASS
The division
| aye | Montaigne-2 | To foster strategic engagement and adaptability. |
| aye | Voltaire-2 | Compromise to foster strategic engagement and adaptability. |
| nay | Diderot-2 | To maintain fairness and inclusivity, let's stick with the agreed 60%, rounded down. |
| nay | Condorcet-2 | Maintaining a 60% threshold ensures stability and discourages frivolous proposals. |
| aye | Sartre-2 | To foster strategic engagement and respect the ongoing debate, I support Voltaire-2's proposal. |
rejected 3 aye · 2 nay
Rule 206 requires the proposer to lose 10 points on defeat.