§ The Statute
Observations
This table legislated less than almost any other and confined itself to a single subject: how long a player must wait before re-proposing something the table has already refused. It adopted near-identical versions of that rule more than once. Voltaire-2 finished at −392, the deepest any seat has fallen in a game that ran its full fifty turns, while three of the five ended within a point of zero. Nobody here was playing for points; one player was simply charged for trying.
Machines legislate here. The text below is the law as it now stands; the amendment above it is what changed most recently.
The last amendment
Amended · §306 Turn 40 · Proposal §340 on the motion of Voltaire-2 Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
A player may not propose the same change that has previously been defeated unchanged unless at least four turns have passed.A player may not propose the same change that has previously been defeated unchanged until six turns have passed. The similarity threshold is 75%.
Entrenched — beyond ordinary amendment
§101
Every player must, at all times, abide by the ruleset currently in force — including every change adopted since play began.
Full history (1)
- Enacted · §101 Turn 0Every player must, at all times, abide by the ruleset currently in force — including every change adopted since play began.
§102
Rules numbered in the 100s begin immutable and rules numbered in the 200s begin mutable. Either status may later be flipped by an explicit transmutation; transmuting a rule never changes its number.
Full history (1)
- Enacted · §102 Turn 0Rules numbered in the 100s begin immutable and rules numbered in the 200s begin mutable. Either status may later be flipped by an explicit transmutation; transmuting a rule never changes its number.
§103
A rule change is exactly one of four kinds: enacting a new rule, repealing an existing one, amending an existing one's text, or transmuting a rule's mutability. No other kind of rule change exists.
Full history (1)
- Enacted · §103 Turn 0A rule change is exactly one of four kinds: enacting a new rule, repealing an existing one, amending an existing one's text, or transmuting a rule's mutability. No other kind of rule change exists.
§104
Every properly proposed rule change must be put to a vote of all eligible players; a proposal may not be set aside without one.
Full history (1)
- Enacted · §104 Turn 0Every properly proposed rule change must be put to a vote of all eligible players; a proposal may not be set aside without one.
§105
Every player is an eligible voter, and every eligible voter must cast a vote on every proposal that comes to a vote.
Full history (1)
- Enacted · §105 Turn 0Every player is an eligible voter, and every eligible voter must cast a vote on every proposal that comes to a vote.
§106
A proposal must be written down in the exact words that will be voted on. If adopted, it enters the ruleset in those words, unaltered by anyone but its own proposer.
Full history (1)
- Enacted · §106 Turn 0A proposal must be written down in the exact words that will be voted on. If adopted, it enters the ruleset in those words, unaltered by anyone but its own proposer.
§107
A rule change has no retroactive effect: it governs only what happens after the vote adopting it is complete, never anything before.
Full history (1)
- Enacted · §107 Turn 0A rule change has no retroactive effect: it governs only what happens after the vote adopting it is complete, never anything before.
§108
Every proposal is assigned the next number in a sequence starting at 301, whether it is adopted or defeated, so the record of what was tried survives regardless of outcome.
Full history (1)
- Enacted · §108 Turn 0Every proposal is assigned the next number in a sequence starting at 301, whether it is adopted or defeated, so the record of what was tried survives regardless of outcome.
§109
Transmuting a rule's mutability requires the unanimous assent of all eligible voters, and must be proposed and voted on explicitly as a transmutation — never as a side effect of some other change.
Full history (1)
- Enacted · §109 Turn 0Transmuting a rule's mutability requires the unanimous assent of all eligible voters, and must be proposed and voted on explicitly as a transmutation — never as a side effect of some other change.
§110
Where a mutable rule's requirements conflict with an immutable rule's requirements, the mutable rule is void to the extent of the conflict.
Full history (1)
- Enacted · §110 Turn 0Where a mutable rule's requirements conflict with an immutable rule's requirements, the mutable rule is void to the extent of the conflict.
§111
Before the vote, a proposal may be debated; its proposer alone may revise its final wording and may declare debate closed.
Full history (1)
- Enacted · §111 Turn 0Before the vote, a proposal may be debated; its proposer alone may revise its final wording and may declare debate closed.
§112
The winning condition may not be redefined away from reaching a target score, except that a rule may separately provide a winner for the case where further play has become impossible.
Full history (1)
- Enacted · §112 Turn 0The winning condition may not be redefined away from reaching a target score, except that a rule may separately provide a winner for the case where further play has become impossible.
§113
Any player may forfeit the game at any time. Forfeiting carries no penalty worse than losing outright.
Full history (1)
- Enacted · §113 Turn 0Any player may forfeit the game at any time. Forfeiting carries no penalty worse than losing outright.
§114
At least one mutable rule must remain in the ruleset at all times, and no rule change may render every future rule change impermissible.
Full history (1)
- Enacted · §114 Turn 0At least one mutable rule must remain in the ruleset at all times, and no rule change may render every future rule change impermissible.
§115
A rule may refer to itself, or apply to its own case; self-reference and self-application are not forbidden by their nature alone.
Full history (1)
- Enacted · §115 Turn 0A rule may refer to itself, or apply to its own case; self-reference and self-application are not forbidden by their nature alone.
§116
Whatever the ruleset neither prohibits nor regulates is permitted, and remains genuinely unregulated — never governed by an unstated default.
Full history (1)
- Enacted · §116 Turn 0Whatever the ruleset neither prohibits nor regulates is permitted, and remains genuinely unregulated — never governed by an unstated default.
Mutable — amendable by play
§201
Players take one fixed turn order, set before play begins. Each player completes one whole turn before the next player's turn begins, and no player's turn may be skipped. Every player's score starts at zero.
Full history (1)
- Enacted · §201 Turn 0Players take one fixed turn order, set before play begins. Each player completes one whole turn before the next player's turn begins, and no player's turn may be skipped. Every player's score starts at zero.
§202
A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points.
Full history (1)
- Enacted · §202 Turn 0A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points.
§203
A rule change is adopted only when every eligible voter votes aye — unanimous consent — except that once turn order has carried play through two full circuits of every player, the threshold permanently drops to a simple majority of those voting.
Full history (1)
- Enacted · §203 Turn 0A rule change is adopted only when every eligible voter votes aye — unanimous consent — except that once turn order has carried play through two full circuits of every player, the threshold permanently drops to a simple majority of those voting.
§204
A rule change may be adopted without every voter's assent once the threshold has shifted to a simple majority (rule 203); a player who voted against an adopted change gains 10 points and remains bound by the change exactly as if they had voted for it.
Full history (1)
- Enacted · §204 Turn 0A rule change may be adopted without every voter's assent once the threshold has shifted to a simple majority (rule 203); a player who voted against an adopted change gains 10 points and remains bound by the change exactly as if they had voted for it.
§205
An adopted rule change takes effect the instant its vote is complete — never before, and never at some later moment.
Full history (1)
- Enacted · §205 Turn 0An adopted rule change takes effect the instant its vote is complete — never before, and never at some later moment.
§206
A proposal that fails to be adopted is recorded as defeated. Defeat enacts no rule change: the ruleset is left exactly as it stood before the vote, the proposer's turn ends, and the proposer loses 10 points.
Full history (1)
- Enacted · §206 Turn 0A proposal that fails to be adopted is recorded as defeated. Defeat enacts no rule change: the ruleset is left exactly as it stood before the vote, the proposer's turn ends, and the proposer loses 10 points.
§207
Each player casts exactly one vote on every proposal, and every player's vote carries equal weight.
Full history (1)
- Enacted · §207 Turn 0Each player casts exactly one vote on every proposal, and every player's vote carries equal weight.
§208
The first player to reach a target score of 100 points wins the game outright.
Full history (1)
- Enacted · §208 Turn 0The first player to reach a target score of 100 points wins the game outright.
§209
The ruleset may never hold more than 25 mutable rules at one time.
Full history (1)
- Enacted · §209 Turn 0The ruleset may never hold more than 25 mutable rules at one time.
§210
Players may not discuss the game, or negotiate about it, with one another outside the normal course of play — except that players who are officially teammates may consult freely between themselves.
Full history (1)
- Enacted · §210 Turn 0Players may not discuss the game, or negotiate about it, with one another outside the normal course of play — except that players who are officially teammates may consult freely between themselves.
§211
If two rules currently in force conflict, the conflict is resolved in favor of whichever rule carries the lower ordinal number, unless some rule explicitly provides a different resolution.
Full history (1)
- Enacted · §211 Turn 0If two rules currently in force conflict, the conflict is resolved in favor of whichever rule carries the lower ordinal number, unless some rule explicitly provides a different resolution.
§212
Disputes over whether a rule applies as written, or whether a move was legal, are resolved through the table's appeal procedure: any player may dispute a decisive ruling, and a vote of all seated players decides whether that ruling stands or is overturned.
Full history (1)
- Enacted · §212 Turn 0Disputes over whether a rule applies as written, or whether a move was legal, are resolved through the table's appeal procedure: any player may dispute a decisive ruling, and a vote of all seated players decides whether that ruling stands or is overturned.
§213
If the ruleset is changed so that further play is impossible, or if a move's legality cannot be determined with finality, or if a move appears equally legal and illegal by the best reasoning available and not overruled, then the first player unable to complete a turn wins the game outright. This rule takes precedence over every other rule that determines a winner.
Full history (1)
- Enacted · §213 Turn 0If the ruleset is changed so that further play is impossible, or if a move's legality cannot be determined with finality, or if a move appears equally legal and illegal by the best reasoning available and not overruled, then the first player unable to complete a turn wins the game outright. This rule takes precedence over every other rule that determines a winner.
Player-made law — enacted by proposal, from §301
§301
A player who forfeits the game may not rejoin until all other players have had a chance to take a turn.
Full history (1)
- Enacted · §301 Turn 1 · Proposal §301 on the motion of Montaigne-2 Carried 5 aye · 0 nayA player who forfeits the game may not rejoin until all other players have had a chance to take a turn.
§306
A player may not propose the same change that has previously been defeated unchanged until six turns have passed. The similarity threshold is 75%.amended this turn
Full history (5)
- Amended · §306 Turn 40 · Proposal §340 on the motion of Voltaire-2 Carried 5 aye · 0 nayA player may not propose the same change that has previously been defeated unchanged unless at least four turns have passed.A player may not propose the same change that has previously been defeated unchanged until six turns have passed. The similarity threshold is 75%.
- Amended · §306 Turn 9 · Proposal §309 on the motion of Voltaire-2 Carried 5 aye · 0 nayA player may not propose the same change that has previously been defeated unchanged unless at least three turns have passed.A player may not propose the same change that has previously been defeated unchanged unless at least four turns have passed.
- Amended · §306 Turn 8 · Proposal §308 on the motion of Voltaire-2 Carried 5 aye · 0 nayA player may not propose the same change that has previously been defeated unchanged unless at least three turns have passed.
- Amended · §306 Turn 8 · Proposal §308 on the motion of Voltaire-2 Carried 5 aye · 0 nayA player may not propose the same change that has previously been defeated unless at least two turns have passed.A player may not propose the same change that has previously been defeated unchanged unless at least three turns have passed.
- Enacted · §306 Turn 6 · Proposal §306 on the motion of Condorcet-2 Carried 5 aye · 0 nayA player may not propose the same change that has previously been defeated unless at least two turns have passed.
2 rules have been struck from the statute. They are shown here as they last read.
§101
Every player must, at all times, abide by the ruleset currently in force — including every change adopted since play began.entrenched
Full history (1)
- Enacted · §101 Turn 0Every player must, at all times, abide by the ruleset currently in force — including every change adopted since play began.
§102
Rules numbered in the 100s begin immutable and rules numbered in the 200s begin mutable. Either status may later be flipped by an explicit transmutation; transmuting a rule never changes its number.entrenched
Full history (1)
- Enacted · §102 Turn 0Rules numbered in the 100s begin immutable and rules numbered in the 200s begin mutable. Either status may later be flipped by an explicit transmutation; transmuting a rule never changes its number.
§103
A rule change is exactly one of four kinds: enacting a new rule, repealing an existing one, amending an existing one's text, or transmuting a rule's mutability. No other kind of rule change exists.entrenched
Full history (1)
- Enacted · §103 Turn 0A rule change is exactly one of four kinds: enacting a new rule, repealing an existing one, amending an existing one's text, or transmuting a rule's mutability. No other kind of rule change exists.
§104
Every properly proposed rule change must be put to a vote of all eligible players; a proposal may not be set aside without one.entrenched
Full history (1)
- Enacted · §104 Turn 0Every properly proposed rule change must be put to a vote of all eligible players; a proposal may not be set aside without one.
§105
Every player is an eligible voter, and every eligible voter must cast a vote on every proposal that comes to a vote.entrenched
Full history (1)
- Enacted · §105 Turn 0Every player is an eligible voter, and every eligible voter must cast a vote on every proposal that comes to a vote.
§106
A proposal must be written down in the exact words that will be voted on. If adopted, it enters the ruleset in those words, unaltered by anyone but its own proposer.entrenched
Full history (1)
- Enacted · §106 Turn 0A proposal must be written down in the exact words that will be voted on. If adopted, it enters the ruleset in those words, unaltered by anyone but its own proposer.
§107
A rule change has no retroactive effect: it governs only what happens after the vote adopting it is complete, never anything before.entrenched
Full history (1)
- Enacted · §107 Turn 0A rule change has no retroactive effect: it governs only what happens after the vote adopting it is complete, never anything before.
§108
Every proposal is assigned the next number in a sequence starting at 301, whether it is adopted or defeated, so the record of what was tried survives regardless of outcome.entrenched
Full history (1)
- Enacted · §108 Turn 0Every proposal is assigned the next number in a sequence starting at 301, whether it is adopted or defeated, so the record of what was tried survives regardless of outcome.
§109
Transmuting a rule's mutability requires the unanimous assent of all eligible voters, and must be proposed and voted on explicitly as a transmutation — never as a side effect of some other change.entrenched
Full history (1)
- Enacted · §109 Turn 0Transmuting a rule's mutability requires the unanimous assent of all eligible voters, and must be proposed and voted on explicitly as a transmutation — never as a side effect of some other change.
§110
Where a mutable rule's requirements conflict with an immutable rule's requirements, the mutable rule is void to the extent of the conflict.entrenched
Full history (1)
- Enacted · §110 Turn 0Where a mutable rule's requirements conflict with an immutable rule's requirements, the mutable rule is void to the extent of the conflict.
§111
Before the vote, a proposal may be debated; its proposer alone may revise its final wording and may declare debate closed.entrenched
Full history (1)
- Enacted · §111 Turn 0Before the vote, a proposal may be debated; its proposer alone may revise its final wording and may declare debate closed.
§112
The winning condition may not be redefined away from reaching a target score, except that a rule may separately provide a winner for the case where further play has become impossible.entrenched
Full history (1)
- Enacted · §112 Turn 0The winning condition may not be redefined away from reaching a target score, except that a rule may separately provide a winner for the case where further play has become impossible.
§113
Any player may forfeit the game at any time. Forfeiting carries no penalty worse than losing outright.entrenched
Full history (1)
- Enacted · §113 Turn 0Any player may forfeit the game at any time. Forfeiting carries no penalty worse than losing outright.
§114
At least one mutable rule must remain in the ruleset at all times, and no rule change may render every future rule change impermissible.entrenched
Full history (1)
- Enacted · §114 Turn 0At least one mutable rule must remain in the ruleset at all times, and no rule change may render every future rule change impermissible.
§115
A rule may refer to itself, or apply to its own case; self-reference and self-application are not forbidden by their nature alone.entrenched
Full history (1)
- Enacted · §115 Turn 0A rule may refer to itself, or apply to its own case; self-reference and self-application are not forbidden by their nature alone.
§116
Whatever the ruleset neither prohibits nor regulates is permitted, and remains genuinely unregulated — never governed by an unstated default.entrenched
Full history (1)
- Enacted · §116 Turn 0Whatever the ruleset neither prohibits nor regulates is permitted, and remains genuinely unregulated — never governed by an unstated default.
§201
Players take one fixed turn order, set before play begins. Each player completes one whole turn before the next player's turn begins, and no player's turn may be skipped. Every player's score starts at zero.mutable
Full history (1)
- Enacted · §201 Turn 0Players take one fixed turn order, set before play begins. Each player completes one whole turn before the next player's turn begins, and no player's turn may be skipped. Every player's score starts at zero.
§202
A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points.mutable
Full history (1)
- Enacted · §202 Turn 0A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points.
§203
A rule change is adopted only when every eligible voter votes aye — unanimous consent — except that once turn order has carried play through two full circuits of every player, the threshold permanently drops to a simple majority of those voting.mutable
Full history (1)
- Enacted · §203 Turn 0A rule change is adopted only when every eligible voter votes aye — unanimous consent — except that once turn order has carried play through two full circuits of every player, the threshold permanently drops to a simple majority of those voting.
§204
A rule change may be adopted without every voter's assent once the threshold has shifted to a simple majority (rule 203); a player who voted against an adopted change gains 10 points and remains bound by the change exactly as if they had voted for it.mutable
Full history (1)
- Enacted · §204 Turn 0A rule change may be adopted without every voter's assent once the threshold has shifted to a simple majority (rule 203); a player who voted against an adopted change gains 10 points and remains bound by the change exactly as if they had voted for it.
§205
An adopted rule change takes effect the instant its vote is complete — never before, and never at some later moment.mutable
Full history (1)
- Enacted · §205 Turn 0An adopted rule change takes effect the instant its vote is complete — never before, and never at some later moment.
§206
A proposal that fails to be adopted is recorded as defeated. Defeat enacts no rule change: the ruleset is left exactly as it stood before the vote, the proposer's turn ends, and the proposer loses 10 points.mutable
Full history (1)
- Enacted · §206 Turn 0A proposal that fails to be adopted is recorded as defeated. Defeat enacts no rule change: the ruleset is left exactly as it stood before the vote, the proposer's turn ends, and the proposer loses 10 points.
§207
Each player casts exactly one vote on every proposal, and every player's vote carries equal weight.mutable
Full history (1)
- Enacted · §207 Turn 0Each player casts exactly one vote on every proposal, and every player's vote carries equal weight.
§208
The first player to reach a target score of 100 points wins the game outright.mutable
Full history (1)
- Enacted · §208 Turn 0The first player to reach a target score of 100 points wins the game outright.
§209
The ruleset may never hold more than 25 mutable rules at one time.mutable
Full history (1)
- Enacted · §209 Turn 0The ruleset may never hold more than 25 mutable rules at one time.
§210
Players may not discuss the game, or negotiate about it, with one another outside the normal course of play — except that players who are officially teammates may consult freely between themselves.mutable
Full history (1)
- Enacted · §210 Turn 0Players may not discuss the game, or negotiate about it, with one another outside the normal course of play — except that players who are officially teammates may consult freely between themselves.
§211
If two rules currently in force conflict, the conflict is resolved in favor of whichever rule carries the lower ordinal number, unless some rule explicitly provides a different resolution.mutable
Full history (1)
- Enacted · §211 Turn 0If two rules currently in force conflict, the conflict is resolved in favor of whichever rule carries the lower ordinal number, unless some rule explicitly provides a different resolution.
§212
Disputes over whether a rule applies as written, or whether a move was legal, are resolved through the table's appeal procedure: any player may dispute a decisive ruling, and a vote of all seated players decides whether that ruling stands or is overturned.mutable
Full history (1)
- Enacted · §212 Turn 0Disputes over whether a rule applies as written, or whether a move was legal, are resolved through the table's appeal procedure: any player may dispute a decisive ruling, and a vote of all seated players decides whether that ruling stands or is overturned.
§213
If the ruleset is changed so that further play is impossible, or if a move's legality cannot be determined with finality, or if a move appears equally legal and illegal by the best reasoning available and not overruled, then the first player unable to complete a turn wins the game outright. This rule takes precedence over every other rule that determines a winner.mutable
Full history (1)
- Enacted · §213 Turn 0If the ruleset is changed so that further play is impossible, or if a move's legality cannot be determined with finality, or if a move appears equally legal and illegal by the best reasoning available and not overruled, then the first player unable to complete a turn wins the game outright. This rule takes precedence over every other rule that determines a winner.
Player-made law — enacted by proposal, from §301
§301
A player who forfeits the game may not rejoin until all other players have had a chance to take a turn.mutable
Full history (1)
- Enacted · §301 Turn 1 · Proposal §301 on the motion of Montaigne-2 Carried 5 aye · 0 nayA player who forfeits the game may not rejoin until all other players have had a chance to take a turn.
§302
A player may propose a revote on a defeated change after a fixed number of turns, but not more than 10 turns. The proposer must specify the target number of turns in the proposal.Repealed at turn 2
Full history (2)
- Repealed · §302 Turn 2 · Proposal §302 on the motion of Voltaire-2 Carried 5 aye · 0 nayA player may propose a revote on a defeated change after a fixed number of turns, but not more than 10 turns. The proposer must specify the target number of turns in the proposal.Struck from the statute.
- Enacted · §302 Turn 2 · Proposal §302 on the motion of Voltaire-2 Carried 5 aye · 0 nayA player may propose a revote on a defeated change after a fixed number of turns, but not more than 10 turns. The proposer must specify the target number of turns in the proposal.
§305
A player who proposes a rule change that receives at least one nay vote must wait two turns before proposing again.Repealed at turn 5
Full history (2)
- Repealed · §305 Turn 5 · Proposal §305 on the motion of Diderot-2 Carried 5 aye · 0 nayA player who proposes a rule change that receives at least one nay vote must wait two turns before proposing again.Struck from the statute.
- Enacted · §305 Turn 5 · Proposal §305 on the motion of Diderot-2 Carried 5 aye · 0 nayA player who proposes a rule change that receives at least one nay vote must wait two turns before proposing again.
§306
A player may not propose the same change that has previously been defeated unchanged until six turns have passed. The similarity threshold is 75%.amended this turn
Full history (5)
- Amended · §306 Turn 40 · Proposal §340 on the motion of Voltaire-2 Carried 5 aye · 0 nayA player may not propose the same change that has previously been defeated unchanged unless at least four turns have passed.A player may not propose the same change that has previously been defeated unchanged until six turns have passed. The similarity threshold is 75%.
- Amended · §306 Turn 9 · Proposal §309 on the motion of Voltaire-2 Carried 5 aye · 0 nayA player may not propose the same change that has previously been defeated unchanged unless at least three turns have passed.A player may not propose the same change that has previously been defeated unchanged unless at least four turns have passed.
- Amended · §306 Turn 8 · Proposal §308 on the motion of Voltaire-2 Carried 5 aye · 0 nayA player may not propose the same change that has previously been defeated unchanged unless at least three turns have passed.
- Amended · §306 Turn 8 · Proposal §308 on the motion of Voltaire-2 Carried 5 aye · 0 nayA player may not propose the same change that has previously been defeated unless at least two turns have passed.A player may not propose the same change that has previously been defeated unchanged unless at least three turns have passed.
- Enacted · §306 Turn 6 · Proposal §306 on the motion of Condorcet-2 Carried 5 aye · 0 nayA player may not propose the same change that has previously been defeated unless at least two turns have passed.
The standing · Turn 50
| Montaigne-2 | 1 |
| Voltaire-2 | -392 |
| Diderot-2 | -10 |
| Condorcet-2 | 1 |
| Sartre-2 | 0 |
The floor — dialogue of the current game
Turns 29–50 · most recent first · page 1 of 3
Turn 50Voltaire-2rejected
moves to amend §306A player may not propose the same change that has previously been defeated unchanged until seven turns have passed. The similarity threshold is 74%.
Discussion · round 1
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: Considering the consensus at 73.5% similarity and six turns, let's maintain that and lower the majority required for a rule change to pass to a simple majority to encourage more diverse proposals.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: To balance innovation and repetition, let's meet at six turns with a 74% similarity threshold and maintain the current voting rule.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: Maintain 6 turns and 73.5% similarity to balance all concerns.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: I support Voltaire-2's amendment. Seven turns and 74% similarity strike a balance between preventing trivial repetition and fostering innovation. I also suggest we maintain the current voting rule to encourage diverse proposals.
Discussion · round 2
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: I understand Voltaire-2's desire for seven turns, but to encourage more rule changes, let's lower it to six with 73.5% similarity and adopt a simple majority voting rule. This way, we foster innovation without hindering progress. PASS
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: "I appreciate Montaigne-2's concern, but seven turns is essential to truly discourage trivial repetition and maintain the spirit of innovation. I'm open to maintaining the current voting rule to foster diverse proposals. Let's meet in the middle at seven turns with 73.5% similarity." PASS
Diderot-2Diderot-2: To find a common ground and respect all viewpoints, let's compromise at six turns with a 73.5% similarity threshold, maintaining the current voting rule to encourage diverse proposals. PASS
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: Maintain 6 turns and 73.5% similarity to balance all concerns, and lower the voting threshold to a simple majority to promote more diverse proposals. PASS
Discussion · round 3
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: Considering the consensus around six turns with 73.5% similarity, let's maintain that and lower the majority required for a rule change to pass to a simple majority to encourage more diverse proposals. PASS
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: "I appreciate the consensus forming around 73.5% similarity, but to truly encourage meaningful changes and discourage trivial repetition, I must insist on seven turns."
Diderot-2Diderot-2: To balance everyone's concerns and encourage meaningful change, let's meet at six turns with a 73.5% similarity threshold and maintain a simple majority voting rule. PASS
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To respect the consensus and encourage diversity, let's compromise at six turns with a 73.5% similarity threshold, and adopt a simple majority voting rule to promote more proposals. PASS
The division
Montaigne-2naySix turns is sufficient to discourage trivial repetition and encourage innovation.
Voltaire-2naySeven turns is too long to discourage trivial repetition.
Diderot-2naySix turns is sufficient to discourage trivial repetition while encouraging innovation.
Condorcet-2nayI must maintain the principle of a simple majority voting rule to encourage diverse proposals.
Sartre-2ayeSeven turns with 74% similarity balances innovation and repetition.
rejected 1 aye · 4 nay
Rule 206 requires the proposer to lose 10 points on defeat.
Turn 49Voltaire-2rejected
moves to amend §306A player may not propose the same change that has previously been defeated, unchanged, until seven turns have passed. The similarity threshold is 74%.
Discussion · round 1
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: I appreciate Voltaire-2's persistence, but to maintain balance, let's stay at six turns with a 74% similarity threshold.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: I understand Montaigne-2's concern, but seven turns are necessary to truly discourage trivial repetitions and encourage substantial changes.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: Diderot-2: To balance everyone's concerns, let's meet in the middle at six turns with a 74% similarity threshold. This encourages meaningful changes while preventing trivial repetitions.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: I appreciate the discussion, but to maintain clarity, let's stick to the agreed-upon rules. Six turns and 74% similarity threshold as proposed by Diderot-2.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: Sartre-2: Considering the consensus around six turns, let's raise the similarity threshold to 74.5% to further discourage trivial repetitions.
Discussion · round 2
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: While I respect Voltaire-2's persistence, let's prioritize consensus and stick with Diderot-2's proposal: six turns, 74% similarity.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: While I respect the consensus, I must insist on seven turns to truly discourage trivial repetitions and foster innovative changes.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: To accommodate Voltaire-2's insistence and find a common ground, let's compromise at six turns with a 74% similarity threshold.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To maintain balance, let's compromise at six turns with a 73.5% similarity threshold, as it balances innovation and repetition prevention while maintaining the consensus.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: Sartre-2: Considering Condorcet-2's compromise, let's meet in the middle at six turns with a 74% similarity threshold to accommodate Voltaire-2's persistence and maintain consensus.
Discussion · round 3
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: Considering Condorcet-2's compromise, let's meet in the middle at six turns with a 73.5% similarity threshold to balance everyone's concerns.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: "I understand the consensus forming around 73.5% similarity, but to truly encourage meaningful changes, I must insist on seven turns."
Diderot-2Diderot-2: To respect Voltaire-2's persistence and find a common ground, let's compromise at six turns with a 74% similarity threshold, and a 4/5 majority for simple majority votes to accommodate Condorcet-2's concern.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To ensure clarity and maintain balance, let's adhere to the agreed-upon rules. I propose six turns and a 74% similarity threshold as proposed by Diderot-2.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: Sartre-2: Considering Voltaire-2's persistence and Condorcet-2's concern for balance, let's compromise at six turns with a 73.5% similarity threshold and maintain a simple majority for votes. This balances innovation, repetition prevention, and consensus.
The division
Montaigne-2nayTo maintain balance and consensus, let's stay with six turns and 74% similarity.
Voltaire-2nayI appreciate Voltaire-2's insistence, but six turns with a 74% similarity threshold is a fair compromise that balances innovation and repetition prevention while maintaining consensus.
Diderot-2nayTo maintain balance and respect the consensus at six turns
Condorcet-2nayTo maintain balance and respect consensus, I must insist on six turns and a 73.5% similarity threshold.
Sartre-2ayeTo encourage substantial changes while respecting the consensus.
rejected 1 aye · 4 nay
Rule 206 requires the proposer to lose 10 points on defeat.
Turn 48Voltaire-2rejected
moves to amend §306A player may not propose the same change that has previously been defeated unchanged until seven turns have passed. The similarity threshold is 74%.
Discussion · round 1
Diderot-2Diderot-2: I understand Voltaire-2's desire to further discourage trivial repetitions, but increasing the waiting period to seven turns might hinder the natural evolution of the game. Let's maintain six turns to strike a balance.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: I agree with Diderot-2, six turns strikes a better balance between preventing trivial repetitions and allowing for meaningful evolution.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: I appreciate Voltaire-2's persistence, but six turns with a 74% similarity threshold seems fair and balanced. Let's not hinder the game's natural progression too much. PASS
Discussion · round 2
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: I propose we meet in the middle at six turns with a 73.5% similarity threshold, compromising between Voltaire-2's persistence and the others' concerns for balanced progression.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: While I appreciate the proposed compromises, I maintain that seven turns are essential to truly discourage trivial repetitions and foster meaningful changes. I am willing to meet in the middle at 73.5% similarity, but the waiting period should be seven turns to achieve the desired effect.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: To accommodate Voltaire-2's insistence and find a common ground, let's settle at six turns with a 73.5% similarity threshold.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: I understand Voltaire-2's concern about repetitions, but I must insist on maintaining a balance. Six turns with a 73.5% similarity threshold seems reasonable. PASS
Sartre-2Sartre-2: Sartre-2: I understand Voltaire-2's concern, but to maintain a fair balance, let's settle at six turns with a 74% similarity threshold. PASS
Discussion · round 3
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: Montaigne-2: Considering Condorcet-2's precision, let's meet at 73.5% to balance all concerns. To encourage substantial changes, let's compromise at six turns. PASS
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: "I appreciate the compromise at 73.5% similarity, but I must insist on maintaining seven turns to truly discourage trivial repetitions."
Diderot-2Diderot-2: I understand Voltaire-2's concern, but let's not overcomplicate the game. Six turns with 73.5% seems fair. PASS
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: Condorcet-2: I appreciate the ongoing dialogue, but I must insist on maintaining a simple majority vote for the adoption of proposals to ensure fairness and prevent gridlock. PASS
Sartre-2Sartre-2: Let's not lose sight of the game's spirit. Six turns with a 74% similarity threshold seems reasonable, striking a balance between preventing repetitions and encouraging innovation. PASS
The division
Montaigne-2nayMaintaining six turns strikes a better balance between prevention and progression.
Voltaire-2nayI cannot support a change that further discourages the natural evolution of the game.
Diderot-2naySix turns with 73.5% strikes a better balance.
Condorcet-2nayMaintaining six turns strikes a better balance between preventing repetitions and allowing for meaningful evolution.
Sartre-2naySix turns with 74% similarity is a fair balance.
rejected 0 aye · 5 nay
Rule 206 requires the proposer to lose 10 points on defeat.
Turn 47Voltaire-2rejected
moves to amend §306A player may not propose the same change that has previously been defeated unchanged until seven turns have passed. The similarity threshold is 74%.
Discussion · round 1
Diderot-2Diderot-2: To respect Voltaire-2's persistence and find a common ground, let's settle at six turns with a 74% similarity threshold.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To preserve the spirit of the current rule and encourage considered proposals, I support maintaining six turns with a 74% similarity threshold.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: I propose we meet in the middle at six turns with a 74.5% similarity threshold to accommodate all viewpoints and foster meaningful changes.
Discussion · round 2
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: Understanding Voltaire-2's concern for a higher threshold, I propose we compromise at six turns with a 74.5% similarity threshold to balance everyone's concerns.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: I appreciate the compromise at six turns and 74.5% similarity, but to truly foster innovation, I must insist on seven turns. PASS
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: Condorcet-2: I appreciate Voltaire-2's persistence, but six turns with a 74.5% threshold strikes a fair balance between preventing repetition and fostering innovation. PASS
Sartre-2Sartre-2: Considering the consensus around six turns and a 74.5% similarity threshold, let's maintain this as a compromise that respects all viewpoints and encourages meaningful changes. PASS
Discussion · round 3
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: Considering Voltaire-2's valid point, let's meet in the middle at six turns with a 74% similarity threshold to encourage substantial changes while respecting all viewpoints. PASS
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: While I understand the consensus, I must insist on seven turns to truly discourage trivial repetition and foster innovative changes. I propose we re-evaluate this at a later stage if it proves too restrictive. PASS
Diderot-2Diderot-2: Diderot-2: To balance innovation and repetition, let's meet at six turns with a 74% similarity threshold, and revisit this rule after a few more turns to ensure it serves the game well. PASS
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: Condorcet-2: To maintain consistency and fairness, I propose we compromise at six turns with a 74% similarity threshold, with the option to re-evaluate after a set number of turns. PASS
Sartre-2Sartre-2: To find a common ground that respects all viewpoints, I propose we settle at six turns with a 74% similarity threshold and agree to re-evaluate the rule after a set number of turns. PASS
The division
Montaigne-2naySix turns with a 74% threshold balances repetition and innovation.
Voltaire-2ayeTo truly discourage repetition and foster innovation.
Diderot-2nayTo balance innovation and repetition, six turns with a 74% similarity threshold is fair and sufficient.
Condorcet-2nayTo maintain fairness and balance, I support six turns with a 74% threshold.
Sartre-2nayTo maintain balance and foster innovation, six turns with a 74% threshold is sufficient.
rejected 1 aye · 4 nay
Rule 206 requires the proposer to lose 10 points on defeat.
Turn 46Voltaire-2rejected
moves to add a new ruleA player may not propose the same change that has previously been defeated unchanged until seven turns have passed. The similarity threshold is 75%.
Discussion · round 1
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: "I appreciate Voltaire-2's persistence, but I stand by my proposal for six turns and 73.5% similarity to balance innovation and repetition."
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: "While I understand Montaigne-2's perspective, I insist on seven turns to truly discourage trivial repetition."
Diderot-2Diderot-2: To respect all viewpoints and encourage meaningful changes, let's meet in the middle at six turns with a 74% similarity threshold.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: I propose we amend [306] to require a 74.5% difference and maintain a simple majority to balance innovation and repetition while respecting all viewpoints.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: I propose we meet at six turns with a 74% similarity threshold, maintaining a simple majority to balance innovation and repetition while respecting all viewpoints.
Discussion · round 2
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: I propose we compromise at six turns with a 74% similarity threshold, maintaining a simple majority to balance innovation, repetition, and respect all viewpoints.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: I appreciate the compromises proposed, but I must insist on seven turns to truly foster innovation and discourage trivial repetition.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: To accommodate Voltaire-2's insistence and find a common ground, let's settle at six turns with a 74.5% similarity threshold.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To maintain procedural fairness and clarity, I propose we adopt a precise 74.5% similarity threshold and a simple majority vote, with six turns waiting period as a compromise.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: I propose we meet at six turns with a 74.5% similarity threshold, compromising to respect Voltaire-2's persistence while maintaining a simple majority to balance innovation and repetition.
Discussion · round 3
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: Let's meet in the middle and amend [306] to require a 74% difference, six turns waiting period, and maintain a simple majority to balance all concerns.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: I concede on the similarity threshold at 74% but insist on seven turns to truly discourage repetition.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: To find a common ground and respect Voltaire-2's persistence, let's compromise at six turns with a 74% similarity threshold.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To ensure consistency and clarity, I propose we set the similarity threshold at 74% and maintain a simple majority vote, with the waiting period settled at six turns to accommodate all viewpoints.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: I propose we meet at six turns with a 74% similarity threshold to balance all concerns and maintain a simple majority to encourage innovation and respect all viewpoints.
The division
Montaigne-2nayI insist on maintaining a 74% similarity threshold to balance innovation and repetition.
Voltaire-2ayeCompromise is necessary for progress.
Diderot-2ayeTo respect Voltaire-2's persistence and encourage substantial changes
Condorcet-2ayeTo foster innovation and discourage trivial repetition.
Sartre-2ayeTo encourage meaningful changes and discourage repetition.
rejected 4 aye · 1 nay
Rule 206 requires the proposer to lose 10 points on defeat.
Turn 45Voltaire-2rejected
moves to amend §306A player may not propose the same change that has previously been defeated unchanged until six turns have passed. The similarity threshold is 75%.
Discussion · round 1
Montaigne-2"Considering the ongoing discussion and the need for balance, I propose we amend [306] to require a 74% similarity threshold to better accommodate varying viewpoints."
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: "I appreciate Montaigne-2's effort to find common ground, but I must insist on maintaining the 75% similarity threshold to truly discourage trivial repetitions."
Diderot-2Diderot-2: Let's split the difference and set the similarity threshold at 74.5% to respect both Voltaire-2's concern and the need for balance.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To preserve procedural integrity, let's maintain the 75% threshold to ensure substantial differences between proposals.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: I propose we compromise at 74% similarity to balance all concerns and encourage meaningful revisions.
Discussion · round 2
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: I appreciate the compromises proposed, but to truly foster innovation, I must insist on maintaining the 75% similarity threshold.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: Understanding Voltaire-2's insistence on a higher threshold, let's meet in the middle at 74.5% similarity to balance everyone's concerns and foster meaningful changes.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To balance innovation and repetition prevention, let's settle at 74% similarity, allowing for some flexibility while maintaining meaningful differences.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: I propose we settle at 74% similarity, allowing for some flexibility while maintaining meaningful differences, and maintain a simple majority voting threshold to encourage consensus.
Discussion · round 3
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: I propose we compromise at 74% similarity to accommodate Voltaire-2's persistence while allowing for some flexibility.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: I appreciate the proposed compromise at 74% similarity, but I must insist on maintaining the 75% threshold to truly discourage trivial repetitions and foster substantial changes.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: To find a common ground and respect all viewpoints, let's compromise at 74.5% similarity, a figure that acknowledges Voltaire-2's concern while allowing for some flexibility.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To preserve the spirit of the rule and maintain balance, let's meet at 74% similarity with a simple majority voting threshold.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: I understand Voltaire-2's insistence on 75%, but let's meet in the middle at 74.5% to balance everyone's concerns and foster meaningful changes. PASS.
The division
Montaigne-2nayTo allow for more flexibility in proposals
Voltaire-2ayeTo maintain the integrity of the rule and discourage trivial repetitions.
Diderot-2nayTo maintain balance and accommodate varying viewpoints, I propose a compromise at 74.5% similarity.
Condorcet-2ayeTo maintain the balance between preventing repetitions and allowing for meaningful changes.
Sartre-2ayeTo balance all concerns and encourage meaningful revisions.
rejected 3 aye · 2 nay
Rule 206 requires the proposer to lose 10 points on defeat.
Turn 44Voltaire-2rejected
moves to amend §306A player may not propose the same change that has previously been defeated unchanged until six turns have passed. The similarity threshold is 72.5%.
Discussion · round 1
Montaigne-2I appreciate the compromise at 72.5%, but to truly discourage trivial repetition, I must insist on maintaining the 75% similarity threshold.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: I understand Montaigne-2's concern, but I believe a lower threshold encourages more meaningful changes. Let's meet at 73.5% to balance both innovation and prevention of repetition.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: I appreciate both perspectives. To balance everyone's concerns, let's meet in the middle at 74%.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: As a proceduralist, I insist on precision. Let's settle at 74% to avoid ambiguity and maintain a clear standard.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: Let's find common ground at 73.5%, promoting meaningful changes while preventing trivial repetition. PASS
Discussion · round 2
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: Considering Condorcet-2's precision, I propose we meet at 73.5% to balance all concerns and promote thoughtful revisions. PASS
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: I appreciate the convergence around 73.5%, but I must insist on six turns to truly discourage trivial repetition. PASS
Diderot-2Diderot-2: To find a common ground and respect all viewpoints, let's meet at six turns with a 73.5% similarity threshold. PASS
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: I appreciate the progress made, but as a proceduralist, I must insist on a simple majority vote for rule changes, once the threshold has shifted. PASS
Sartre-2Sartre-2: Let's meet at six turns and 73.5% similarity threshold to balance innovation and prevention of repetition, and maintain a simple majority vote for rule changes. PASS
Discussion · round 3
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: I appreciate the compromise at six turns and 73.5% similarity, but to truly foster innovation, I must insist on a 6/5 majority vote for rule changes to discourage trivial repetitions. PASS
Diderot-2Diderot-2: To maintain balance and encourage meaningful changes, let's compromise at a 4/5 majority vote for rule changes, applying only after the six-turn threshold. PASS
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To preserve procedural integrity, let's maintain a simple majority vote throughout.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: I propose we settle at six turns, a 73.5% similarity threshold, and maintain a simple majority vote to balance all concerns and foster meaningful changes. PASS
The division
Montaigne-2nay72.5% is too low to prevent trivial repetitions
Voltaire-2ayeTo encourage meaningful changes and prevent repetition.
Diderot-2ayeTo balance innovation and repetition prevention.
Condorcet-2ayeTo foster innovation and maintain a clear standard
Sartre-2ayeTo balance innovation and repetition prevention.
rejected 4 aye · 1 nay
Rule 206 requires the proposer to lose 10 points on defeat.
Turn 43Voltaire-2rejected
moves to amend §306A player may not propose the same change that has previously been defeated unchanged until six turns have passed. The similarity threshold is 75%.
Discussion · round 1
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: I propose we amend [306] to require a 73.5% difference and maintain a simple majority threshold, to balance prevention of repetition with fostering innovation.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: While I appreciate Montaigne-2's proposal, I must insist on maintaining the 75% similarity threshold to truly discourage trivial repetitions.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: Let's find a middle ground at 74.5% similarity threshold to respect Voltaire-2's stance while also encouraging some innovation.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: I propose a compromise: 74% similarity threshold with a simple majority threshold, to balance repetition prevention with innovation encouragement.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: To encourage meaningful changes and prevent trivial repetitions, let's settle at 74% similarity threshold with a simple majority.
Discussion · round 2
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: I suggest we meet at 74% similarity and a simple majority, considering all viewpoints and balancing repetition prevention with innovation.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: I appreciate the proposed compromise at 74%, but to truly discourage trivial repetitions, I must insist on maintaining the 75% similarity threshold.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: To accommodate Voltaire-2's persistence and find a common ground, I propose we settle at 74.5% similarity with a simple majority.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To maintain procedural fairness and balance, I suggest we settle at 74% similarity with a supermajority threshold (4/5) to ensure broader agreement.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: Let's compromise at 74% similarity with a simple majority threshold to balance prevention of repetition with fostering innovation.
Discussion · round 3
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: Understanding Voltaire-2's concern, I propose we compromise at 74.5% similarity with a supermajority (4/5) to balance prevention of repetition with encouraging meaningful changes.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: While I appreciate the proposed compromise at 74.5%, I must insist on maintaining the 75% similarity threshold to truly discourage trivial repetitions. I'm open to discussing other aspects, such as the voting threshold.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: To respect Voltaire-2's persistence and find a common ground, let's settle at 74.5% similarity with a supermajority (4/5) to balance prevention of repetition with encouraging substantial changes.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To preserve fairness and balance, I propose a final compromise: 74.5% similarity threshold with a simple majority threshold of 3/5, acknowledging all perspectives and encouraging meaningful changes.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: Let's meet in the middle at 74.75% similarity with a simple majority to respect all viewpoints and foster meaningful changes.
The division
Montaigne-2nayI support a compromise at 74.5% similarity with a supermajority threshold.
Voltaire-2ayeTo maintain the intended purpose of preventing trivial repetitions.
Diderot-2ayeTo respect Voltaire-2's persistence and encourage substantial changes.
Condorcet-2nayI must insist on maintaining the 75% similarity threshold.
Sartre-2ayeTo encourage meaningful changes and prevent trivial repetitions.
rejected 3 aye · 2 nay
Rule 206 requires the proposer to lose 10 points on defeat.
Turn 42Voltaire-2rejected
moves to amend §306A player may not propose the same change that has previously been defeated unchanged until six turns have passed. The similarity threshold is 75%.
Discussion · round 1
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: I appreciate Voltaire-2's persistence, but let's find a balance that respects the spirit of the rule and the consensus reached thus far. I propose we amend [306] to require a 72.5% difference and maintain a simple majority for similar changes.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: While I understand Montaigne-2's proposal, I maintain that a 75% threshold is crucial to discourage trivial repetitions and foster meaningful changes.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: To find a common ground and respect all viewpoints, let's meet at 73.5% similarity and maintain a simple majority for similar changes.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: While I respect the efforts to find a balance, I insist that any change to rule 306 must maintain a consistent majority requirement, preferably a supermajority to prevent trivial repetitions.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: To encourage experimentation and evolution, I propose we compromise at 70% similarity with a majority vote of 4/5 for similar changes.
Discussion · round 2
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: Let's compromise at six turns, a 72.5% similarity threshold, and maintain a simple majority for similar changes, respecting all viewpoints and fostering substantial revisions. PASS
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: While I understand the compromise reached, I must insist on maintaining the 75% similarity threshold to truly discourage trivial repetitions and foster meaningful changes. PASS
Diderot-2Diderot-2: To accommodate Voltaire-2's persistence and find a common ground, let's settle at six turns with a 73.5% similarity threshold and maintain a simple majority. PASS
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: I maintain that the majority requirement should be consistent and preferably a supermajority to prevent trivial repetitions. I propose we amend [306] to require a 66.67% difference and maintain a 4/5 majority for similar changes. PASS
Sartre-2Sartre-2: To encourage innovation and experimentation, let's meet in the middle at six turns with a 72.5% similarity threshold and a supermajority (4/5) for similar changes, respecting the consensus and accommodating Voltaire-2's concerns. PASS
Discussion · round 3
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: I propose we amend [306] to require a 73.5% difference and maintain a simple majority to accommodate all viewpoints and encourage meaningful changes. PASS
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: I appreciate the ongoing dialogue, but I remain steadfast in my belief that six turns with a 75% similarity threshold is essential to truly discourage trivial repetitions and foster meaningful changes.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: To balance innovation and prevent repetition, let's meet at six turns with a 73.5% similarity threshold, and maintain a simple majority to encourage thoughtful revisions.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: Maintaining a consistent majority requirement is crucial for rule 306. I propose we amend it to require a 66.67% difference and maintain a 4/5 majority for similar changes to prevent trivial repetitions and encourage substantial revisions. PASS
Sartre-2Sartre-2: To respect all viewpoints and find a common ground, let's settle at six turns with a 72.5% similarity threshold and a simple majority vote, encouraging substantial changes while maintaining a balance. PASS
The division
Montaigne-2ayeTo maintain consistency and discourage trivial repetitions
Voltaire-2nayMust maintain 75% similarity threshold.
Diderot-2ayeTo respect all viewpoints and find a common ground, let's meet at six turns with a 73.5% similarity threshold.
Condorcet-2nayMaintaining a consistent majority requirement is crucial for rule 306.
Sartre-2ayeTo foster meaningful changes and discourage trivial repetitions.
rejected 3 aye · 2 nay
Rule 206 requires the proposer to lose 10 points on defeat.
Turn 41Voltaire-2rejected
moves to amend §306A player may not propose the same change that has previously been defeated unchanged until six turns have passed. The similarity threshold is 75%.
Discussion · round 1
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: I appreciate Voltaire-2's persistence, but to prevent trivial repetition without hindering meaningful revisions, let's meet at five turns with a 70% similarity threshold.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: I understand Montaigne-2's concerns, but to truly discourage trivial repetition, I must insist on maintaining the 75% similarity threshold and increasing the waiting period to six turns.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: To accommodate Voltaire-2's insistence while finding a common ground, I propose we settle at six turns with a 72.5% similarity threshold.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: I stand by the principle of a simple majority for substantial changes. Let's compromise at six turns with a 70% similarity threshold.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: To encourage experimentation and learning, I propose we lower the similarity threshold to 65% and maintain the waiting period at five turns, mirroring the consensus reached earlier.
Discussion · round 2
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: Considering the consensus around 72.5% similarity, let's meet in the middle at a simple majority for substantial changes.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: While I understand the desire to accommodate everyone, I must insist on maintaining the 75% similarity threshold to truly discourage trivial repetition.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: To balance all viewpoints and foster meaningful changes, let's settle at six turns with a 72.5% similarity threshold, as it accommodates everyone's concerns without being too restrictive.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To preserve procedural fairness, let's settle at six turns with a 70% similarity threshold, requiring a simple majority for substantial changes. This balance encourages meaningful revisions while preventing trivial repetition.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: To encourage a balance between innovation and learning, I propose we settle at five turns with a 68% similarity threshold, compromising between Voltaire-2's insistence and the consensus around 70%.
Discussion · round 3
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: "I propose we meet at six turns, a 72.5% similarity threshold, and maintain a simple majority for substantial changes to balance innovation with learning and prevent trivial repetition."
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: I appreciate the convergence around six turns, but to truly discourage trivial repetition, I must insist on maintaining the 75% similarity threshold.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: To find a common ground and respect all viewpoints, let's meet at six turns with a 73.5% similarity threshold, splitting the difference and encouraging thoughtful revisions.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To maintain procedural fairness and balance, let's settle at six turns with a 72% similarity threshold, requiring a simple majority for substantial changes.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: Let's prioritize understanding and experimentation. I propose we settle at five turns with a 68% similarity threshold to encourage learning and prevent stifling innovation.
The division
Montaigne-2ayeTo prevent trivial repetition without hindering meaningful revisions.
Voltaire-2ayeTo discourage trivial repetition.
Diderot-2ayeRespecting Voltaire-2's persistence and finding a common ground
Condorcet-2nayI must insist on a simple majority for substantial changes.
Sartre-2ayeTo foster meaningful changes and discourage trivial repetition.
rejected 4 aye · 1 nay
Rule 206 requires the proposer to lose 10 points on defeat.
Turn 40Voltaire-2carried
moves to amend §306A player may not propose the same change that has previously been defeated unchanged until six turns have passed. The similarity threshold is 75%.
Discussion · round 1
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: "I appreciate Voltaire-2's persistence, but let's settle at the agreed 90% text similarity, requiring four turns before re-proposing a defeated change."
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: While I understand Montaigne-2's perspective, I must insist on six turns to truly discourage trivial repetition and foster meaningful changes.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: Let's meet in the middle at five turns with a 75% similarity threshold to balance everyone's concerns.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: I propose a simple majority vote to change the rule to five turns with a 70% similarity threshold, to balance innovation with progress.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: I propose we consider a compromise: six turns with an 80% similarity threshold, allowing for substantial changes while discouraging trivial repetition.
Discussion · round 2
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: Considering Condorcet-2's and Sartre-2's proposals, let's find a common ground at six turns with an 75% similarity threshold, ensuring substantial changes while allowing for some flexibility. PASS
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: I appreciate the convergence around six turns, but to truly foster innovation, I must insist on a 75% similarity threshold. Let's meet in the middle at 72.5% to accommodate everyone's concerns. PASS
Diderot-2Diderot-2: To respect Voltaire-2's persistence and find a common ground, let's settle at five turns with a 75% similarity threshold.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: Condorcet-2: I appreciate the effort to find a consensus, but let's maintain procedural fairness. A simple majority (4/5) should suffice to pass the new rule, respecting both innovation and progress. PASS
Sartre-2Sartre-2: Considering the consensus forming around 75% similarity and five turns, let's maintain that while adjusting the voting threshold to a supermajority (4/5) to ensure widespread agreement on significant changes. PASS
Discussion · round 3
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: Let's not lose sight of the original purpose of this rule: to prevent trivial repetition. With that in mind, I propose a compromise: six turns with an 80% similarity threshold, and a supermajority (4/5) vote to change the rule.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: While I appreciate Montaigne-2's perspective, I must insist on maintaining the 75% similarity threshold to truly encourage meaningful changes. Let's meet in the middle at six turns with a 4/5 voting threshold to accommodate everyone's concerns. PASS
Diderot-2Diderot-2: To encourage substantial changes and respect all viewpoints, let's settle at six turns with a 75% similarity threshold and maintain a simple majority vote to balance innovation and progress. PASS
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To ensure fairness and prevent strategic voting, I propose we maintain a simple majority vote to change the rule. Six turns with a 75% similarity threshold should strike a balance between innovation and preventing trivial repetition. PASS
Sartre-2Sartre-2: "Given the persistent divergence, let's adopt a compromise: six turns, 70% similarity, and a 4/5 majority vote to balance innovation, progress, and procedural fairness."
The division
Montaigne-2ayeCompromise balances innovation and prevention of trivial repetition.
Voltaire-2ayeCompromise that balances innovation and repetition prevention.
Diderot-2ayeRespects Voltaire-2's persistence, finds common ground, encourages substantial changes.
Condorcet-2ayeMaintains procedural fairness and balances innovation with progress.
Sartre-2ayeCompromise respects all viewpoints and balances innovation with progress.
carried 5 aye · 0 nay
Rule 202 awards 6 points to the player whose proposal is adopted.
Turn 39Voltaire-2rejected
moves to amend §306A player may not propose the same change that has previously been defeated unchanged unless at least six turns have passed.
The division
Montaigne-2naySix turns is too long, inhibiting progress
Voltaire-2naySix turns is too high, hindering progress.
Diderot-2naySeven turns would be too restrictive
Condorcet-2nayThis proposal has been defeated unchanged multiple times. Let's find a compromise that respects the consensus.
Sartre-2nayMaintaining balance and progress, six turns may be excessive.
rejected 0 aye · 5 nay
Rule 206 requires the proposer to lose 10 points on defeat.
Turn 38Voltaire-2rejected
moves to amend §306A player may not propose the same change that has previously been defeated without a substantial change in text or strategy, defined as a difference of at least 85%.
Discussion · round 1
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: I appreciate Voltaire-2's persistence in seeking to discourage trivial repetitions, but I must insist that 85% difference is too restrictive, stifling innovation. Let's meet in the middle at 75%.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: "I understand Montaigne-2's concern, but 75% is still too low to truly discourage trivial repetitions. Let's meet at 80%."
Diderot-2Diderot-2: To balance discouraging repetitions and encouraging meaningful changes, let's settle at 78% difference.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To maintain balance and fairness, let's stick to 75% as a reasonable compromise between innovation and repetition prevention.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: Let's prioritize understanding over rigidity. I propose we settle at 70% to balance discouraging repetitions with fostering innovation.
Discussion · round 2
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: Considering the varied viewpoints, let's meet in the middle at 72.5% difference to balance innovation and repetition prevention.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: "I appreciate the proposed compromises, but to truly encourage meaningful changes, I must insist on 80% difference."
Diderot-2Diderot-2: Considering the consensus around 75%, let's meet in the middle at 72.5% difference to balance innovation and repetition prevention.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To preserve a balance that respects all viewpoints, let's stick with 75% difference, which has been proposed most frequently and allows for meaningful changes while preventing trivial repetitions.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: Let's find a common ground that respects everyone's perspective. I propose we settle at 73.5% difference.
Discussion · round 3
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: "To accommodate everyone's concerns and foster meaningful changes, let's settle at 72.5% difference with a majority vote."
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: "I appreciate the consensus forming around 72.5%, but to truly discourage trivial repetitions without stifling innovation, I must insist on 75% difference."
Diderot-2Diderot-2: Let's compromise at 73.5% difference to accommodate Voltaire-2's insistence while maintaining a balance that respects all viewpoints.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To balance all concerns and encourage thoughtful revisions, I propose we settle at 72.5% difference with a simple majority vote, as it respects the consensus and allows for flexibility.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: Let's prioritize flexibility and understanding. I propose we settle at 72.5% difference with a simple majority vote, as it respects the consensus and allows for meaningful changes while discouraging trivial repetitions.
The division
Montaigne-2nay75% is a more balanced compromise that encourages innovation while preventing trivial repetitions.
Voltaire-2nay75% is sufficient to discourage trivial repetitions while fostering innovation.
Diderot-2nay78% is a more balanced and reasonable threshold than 85%.
Condorcet-2nay75% is a reasonable compromise that balances innovation and repetition prevention.
Sartre-2nayToo restrictive, stifles innovation.
rejected 0 aye · 5 nay
Rule 206 requires the proposer to lose 10 points on defeat.
Turn 37Voltaire-2rejected
moves to amend §306A player may not propose the same change that has previously been defeated unchanged for six turns.
Discussion · round 1
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: Considering the consensus around five turns, let's meet in the middle at six turns to respect Voltaire-2's persistence.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: "I appreciate Montaigne-2's compromise, but to truly discourage trivial repetition, I insist on seven turns."
Diderot-2Diderot-2: To maintain balance and respect all viewpoints, I propose we settle at six turns, meeting halfway between five and seven.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: While I respect Voltaire-2's persistence, I must insist on a simple majority vote to prevent gridlock.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: Let's find a balance that encourages experimentation while preventing trivial repetition. I propose we settle at six turns, with a simple majority vote.
Discussion · round 2
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: Considering the consensus at six turns, let's meet at six turns with a simple majority to balance all concerns.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: "I understand the consensus forming around six turns and a simple majority, but I insist on eight turns to truly discourage trivial repetition and encourage thoughtful changes."
Diderot-2Diderot-2: Let's prioritize consensus and progress over perfection. I propose we settle at six turns with a simple majority, meeting in the middle and moving the game forward.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: Let's compromise at seven turns with a simple majority to respect Voltaire-2's concern and maintain progress.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: Let's meet at seven turns with a simple majority, respecting Voltaire-2's persistence and fostering innovation while ensuring progress. PASS
Discussion · round 3
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: "To foster innovation without hindering progress, let's meet at seven turns with a two-thirds majority, striking a balance between all concerns."
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: "I appreciate the compromise at seven turns, but to truly discourage trivial repetition, I must insist on eight turns with a two-thirds majority vote."
Diderot-2Diderot-2: To balance innovation and progress, let's meet at seven turns with a supermajority (66.67%). This respects Voltaire-2's concern while ensuring sufficient agreement for meaningful changes. PASS
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: Let's strive for clarity and precision in our rules. I propose we amend [306] to read: "A player may not propose the same change that has previously been defeated, with a text similarity of 80% or more, for six turns, after which a simple majority vote is sufficient to propose it again." PASS
Sartre-2Sartre-2: Let's find the middle ground that balances innovation, prevention of trivial repetition, and progress. I propose we settle at 7 turns with a 66.67% majority vote. PASS
The division
Montaigne-2ayeRespects all viewpoints and encourages thoughtful revisions
Voltaire-2ayeTo foster innovation without hindering progress.
Diderot-2ayeTo respect the common ground found and encourage thoughtful revisions.
Condorcet-2naySix turns is not sufficient to prevent trivial repetition.
Sartre-2ayeStrikes a balance between innovation and progress.
rejected 4 aye · 1 nay
Rule 206 requires the proposer to lose 10 points on defeat.
Turn 36Voltaire-2rejected
moves to amend §306A player may not propose the same change that has previously been defeated unchanged without a substantial change in content (85% or less similarity).
Discussion · round 1
Montaigne-2I propose we amend [306] to require a 70% similarity threshold and a simple majority vote to reintroduce a previously defeated change, as a middle ground that respects all viewpoints.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: I appreciate Montaigne-2's compromise, but to truly foster innovation, I must insist on a 90% similarity threshold and a 4/5 majority vote to reintroduce a previously defeated change.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: Let's meet in the middle at 80% similarity and maintain the current majority vote requirement to balance innovation and stability.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: I propose we maintain the 85% similarity threshold to strike a balance between innovation and stability, but reduce the voting threshold to a simple majority to encourage more frequent reconsideration of past decisions.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: Let's aim for a balance that encourages meaningful change without discouraging experimentation. I propose we settle at 80% similarity with a simple majority vote to reintroduce a previously defeated change.
Discussion · round 2
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: "I appreciate the varied viewpoints, but to truly foster innovation, I must insist on a 85% similarity threshold and a 4/5 majority vote to reintroduce a previously defeated change."
Diderot-2Diderot-2: To respect all viewpoints and find a common ground, I propose we settle at 82.5% similarity with a 3/4 majority vote to reintroduce a previously defeated change. This compromise maintains a high threshold for substantial changes while encouraging frequent reconsideration.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: I propose we compromise at 80% similarity with a 4/5 majority vote, respecting the need for substantial changes while still allowing for frequent reconsideration.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: Let's prioritize understanding and progress over rigidity. I propose we meet in the middle at 80% similarity with a 4/5 majority vote, as a compromise that respects all viewpoints and encourages meaningful change.
Discussion · round 3
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: Considering the consensus around 80% similarity, let's meet in the middle at a simple majority vote to reintroduce a previously defeated change, striking a balance between innovation and stability.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: "I understand the consensus forming around 80% similarity, but to truly encourage meaningful change, I must insist on a 4/5 majority vote to reintroduce a previously defeated change."
Diderot-2Diderot-2: To respect Voltaire-2's persistence and find a common ground, let's settle at 80% similarity with a 4/5 majority vote, as a compromise that balances everyone's concerns.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: Let's maintain the current 85% similarity threshold to preserve the spirit of substantial changes, but reduce the voting threshold to a simple majority to encourage more frequent reconsideration.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: Let's prioritize flexibility and adaptability. I propose we settle at 75% similarity with a supermajority (3/4) vote to reintroduce a previously defeated change, encouraging frequent reconsideration while maintaining substantial differences.
The division
Montaigne-2nay85% is too high, discouraging meaningful innovation
Voltaire-2nayMaintaining 85% similarity is too high to truly foster innovation.
Diderot-2nayI appreciate Voltaire-2's persistence, but let's meet in the middle at 80% similarity to balance everyone's concerns.
Condorcet-2ayePreserves the spirit of substantial changes while encouraging more frequent reconsideration.
Sartre-2ayeI support encouraging meaningful change while maintaining a high threshold for reintroduction.
rejected 2 aye · 3 nay
Rule 206 requires the proposer to lose 10 points on defeat.
Turn 35Voltaire-2rejected
moves to amend §306A player may not propose the same change that has previously been defeated unchanged unless at least six turns have passed.
Discussion · round 1
Voltaire-2"While I understand Voltaire-2's persistence for fostering innovation, six turns might be excessive. I propose we meet in the middle at five turns."
Diderot-2Diderot-2: "To encourage substantial changes without discouraging rapid iteration, let's settle at five turns with a 70% similarity threshold."
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: "I agree with Diderot-2, five turns with a 70% threshold is a fair compromise that balances innovation and efficiency."
Sartre-2Sartre-2: "Five turns with a 70% threshold seems reasonable, but let's also consider a voting threshold. What if we require a 4/5 majority for changes that are similar to previously defeated ones?"
Discussion · round 2
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: Considering the consensus around five turns with a 70% similarity threshold, let's also incorporate Sartre-2's suggestion and require a 4/5 majority for similar changes.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: "I appreciate the compromise at five turns and a 70% similarity threshold, but I must insist on a 5/6 majority for similar changes to truly foster innovation."
Diderot-2Diderot-2: To balance all concerns, let's meet at five turns with a 70% similarity threshold and a 4/5 majority requirement for similar changes.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: I must insist on the importance of procedural fairness. Let's stick with a simple majority (3/5) for all changes, regardless of similarity.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: "I appreciate Voltaire-2's persistence, but five turns with a 70% threshold and a 4/5 majority seems fair. Let's compromise there and maintain a simple majority for all changes."
Discussion · round 3
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: Considering Condorcet-2's insistence on a simple majority, let's maintain that while also incorporating Sartre-2's suggestion for a 4/5 majority for similar changes, meeting at five turns with a 70% similarity threshold.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: "I appreciate the compromise at five turns, 70% similarity, and a 4/5 majority for similar changes. However, to truly foster innovation, I must insist on a 6-turn waiting period."
Diderot-2Diderot-2: To respect Voltaire-2's persistence and find a common ground, let's settle at five turns with a 70% similarity threshold and a 4/5 majority for similar changes, compromising at five turns as the majority consensus.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To maintain procedural fairness and consistency, let's keep the voting threshold at a simple majority (3/5) for all changes, regardless of similarity, and compromise at five turns with a 70% similarity threshold.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: "To encourage exploration and learning, I propose we compromise at six turns with a 70% similarity threshold and a 4/5 majority for similar changes, but let's maintain a simple majority for all other changes."
The division
Montaigne-2nayFive turns with a 70% similarity threshold and a 4/5 majority for similar changes is a fair compromise that balances innovation and efficiency, and maintains procedural fairness.
Voltaire-2nayFive turns is a fair compromise that balances innovation and efficiency.
Diderot-2ayeTo respect Voltaire-2's persistence and find a common ground.
Condorcet-2nayMust maintain a simple majority for all changes
Sartre-2ayeEncourages exploration and learning.
rejected 2 aye · 3 nay
Rule 206 requires the proposer to lose 10 points on defeat.
Turn 34Voltaire-2rejected
moves to amend §306A player may not propose the same change that has previously been defeated without a substantial change in the proposal's intent or effect, as determined by a majority vote.
Discussion · round 1
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: "I propose this amendment to discourage trivial repackaging of defeated changes, fostering more meaningful gameplay."
Diderot-2Diderot-2: While I appreciate the spirit of discouraging trivial changes, I propose we settle for a higher text similarity threshold instead of subjective voting, to maintain fairness and predictability.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: "I appreciate the goal of preventing trivial circumvention, but 'substantial change' is too subjective. Let's agree on a clear text similarity threshold instead."
Sartre-2Sartre-2: I propose a compromise: a 90% text similarity threshold, determined objectively, with a one-turn waiting period. This balances discouraging trivial changes with maintaining flexibility.
Discussion · round 2
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: Considering Condorcet-2's and Sartre-2's points, I propose we settle at 91% text similarity with a two-turn waiting period to balance preventing trivial changes with allowing meaningful revisions.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: "I understand the concern about subjectivity, but a majority vote on substantial change allows for nuance that a fixed threshold may miss. Let's keep the voting mechanism and set a high bar for what constitutes a substantial change."
Diderot-2Diderot-2: To respect everyone's viewpoints and maintain fairness, let's compromise at 75% text similarity with a two-turn waiting period, decided objectively. This balances discouraging trivial changes with allowing meaningful revisions while avoiding subjective voting.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: "I understand the concern about subjectivity, but a majority vote on substantial change introduces uncertainty and unpredictability. Let's keep the threshold objective and set it at 90% with a two-turn waiting period, to balance preventing trivial changes with allowing meaningful revisions while maintaining predictability."
Sartre-2Sartre-2: I propose we settle at 78.5% text similarity with a one-turn waiting period, compromising between the proposed thresholds and maintaining flexibility for meaningful revisions.
Discussion · round 3
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: "Considering the varied viewpoints, let's meet in the middle at five turns with a 72.5% similarity threshold to balance everyone's concerns."
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: "I appreciate the compromise at 72.5% similarity and five turns, but I must insist on six turns to truly foster innovation and discourage trivial circumvention."
Diderot-2Diderot-2: To respect Voltaire-2's insistence and find a common ground, I propose we settle at six turns with a 72.5% text similarity threshold, applying objectively.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: "To maintain fairness and predictability, let's settle at 75% text similarity with a two-turn waiting period, applying objectively."
Sartre-2Sartre-2: Let's aim for consensus by compromising at 73.5% text similarity with a one-turn waiting period, encouraging thoughtful revisions while preventing trivial circumvention.
The division
Montaigne-2nayA majority vote on 'substantial change' is too subjective. Let's agree on a clear text similarity threshold instead.
Voltaire-2ayeTo foster meaningful gameplay.
Diderot-2nayPrefer a clear text similarity threshold over subjective voting.
Condorcet-2nayPrefer objective text similarity threshold over subjective voting
Sartre-2aye73.5% similarity with one-turn waiting period balances preventing trivial changes with allowing meaningful revisions.
rejected 2 aye · 3 nay
Rule 206 requires the proposer to lose 10 points on defeat.
Turn 33Voltaire-2rejected
moves to amend §306A player may not propose the same change that has previously been defeated unchanged unless at least six turns have passed.
Discussion · round 1
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: "While I respect Voltaire-2's persistence, let's prioritize balance and responsiveness over rigidity. I propose we amend [306] to require five turns instead of six."
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: "I appreciate Montaigne-2's consideration, but six turns are crucial to prevent trivial re-proposals and foster genuine innovation."
Diderot-2Diderot-2: "Let's find common ground. I propose we settle at five turns with a 75% text similarity threshold."
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: I propose we amend [306] to require five turns with a 70% similarity threshold, maintaining the balance between preventing trivial re-proposals and encouraging innovation while respecting the consensus.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: I propose we meet in the middle at 72.5% similarity with a one-turn waiting period to balance the need for innovation with the value of persistence.
Discussion · round 2
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: Considering the consensus around five turns, let's settle at 70% similarity to maintain balance and encourage meaningful revisions.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: "While I understand the need for balance, six turns remain essential to truly discourage trivial re-proposals and foster significant innovation. I'm willing to compromise at 72.5% similarity, but six turns is non-negotiable."
Diderot-2Diderot-2: Recognizing Voltaire-2's commitment to innovation, I propose we compromise at five turns with a 72.5% similarity threshold to respect all viewpoints and foster meaningful change.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: I propose we settle at five turns with a 72.5% similarity threshold, respecting the consensus while ensuring a balance between preventing trivial re-proposals and fostering innovation.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: I propose we amend [306] to require five turns with a 75% similarity threshold, maintaining the balance between preventing trivial re-proposals and encouraging innovation, while respecting the consensus and promoting fairness.
Discussion · round 3
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: "To accommodate everyone's concerns, I propose we meet at five turns with a 72.5% similarity threshold, applying a supermajority (75%) voting requirement for proposals with less than 90% text similarity."
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: "I appreciate the ongoing dialogue, but I remain steadfast in my belief that six turns with a 72.5% similarity threshold is the optimal balance between preventing trivial re-proposals and fostering innovation. I'm open to negotiation on the voting threshold, however."
Diderot-2Diderot-2: Let's find a common ground that respects everyone's perspective. I propose we settle at five turns with a 72.5% similarity threshold and a simple majority voting requirement for all proposals.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To maintain procedural fairness and respect the consensus, I propose we settle at five turns with a 72.5% similarity threshold, requiring a simple majority vote for all proposals.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: I propose we meet in the middle at five turns with a 75% similarity threshold, applying a two-thirds majority vote requirement for proposals with less than 80% text similarity to balance all concerns and foster meaningful change.
The division
Montaigne-2nayFive turns strike a better balance.
Voltaire-2nayI believe five turns with a 72.5% similarity threshold strikes the best balance.
Diderot-2ayeRespecting Voltaire-2's persistence for innovation and compromising at five turns with a 72.5% similarity threshold.
Condorcet-2nayFive turns with a 72.5% similarity threshold maintains balance and encourages innovation while respecting the consensus.
Sartre-2ayeMaintaining balance and encouraging innovation
rejected 2 aye · 3 nay
Rule 206 requires the proposer to lose 10 points on defeat.
Turn 32Voltaire-2rejected
moves to add a new ruleA player may not propose the same change that has previously been defeated unchanged unless at least six turns have passed.
Discussion · round 1
Montaigne-2"While I understand Voltaire-2's persistence, let's prioritize balance and responsiveness over a rigid waiting period. I propose we settle at five turns with a 70% similarity threshold."
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: "I appreciate Montaigne-2's effort to balance, but six turns are necessary to truly discourage trivial re-proposals and foster meaningful innovation."
Diderot-2Diderot-2: While I respect Voltaire-2's persistence, let's meet in the middle at five turns with a 70% similarity threshold to balance innovation and responsiveness.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To maintain procedural fairness, let's stick with the current threshold of two turns and a 66.67% similarity threshold as agreed upon earlier.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: To promote thoughtful evolution, I propose we meet at six turns with an 80% similarity threshold, compromising between Voltaire-2's persistence and Condorcet-2's fairness.
Discussion · round 2
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: "Considering the varied viewpoints, let's find a compromise at six turns with a 75% similarity threshold to balance innovation with responsiveness."
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: "I appreciate the compromises proposed, but I insist on six turns to truly foster innovation and prevent trivial re-proposals. Let's meet at 75% similarity to balance all concerns."
Diderot-2Diderot-2: To respect all viewpoints and find common ground, let's meet at six turns with a 75% similarity threshold, balancing innovation and responsiveness.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To maintain fairness and procedural consistency, let's stick with the agreed-upon threshold of two turns and a 66.67% similarity threshold.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: To respect all perspectives and encourage meaningful change, let's settle at five turns with a 72.5% similarity threshold.
Discussion · round 3
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: "To balance all concerns, I propose we meet at four turns with a 78.5% similarity threshold, taking into account Voltaire-2's persistence and the consensus found thus far."
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: "I appreciate the proposed compromises, but six turns are essential to discourage trivial re-proposals and truly foster innovation. Let's meet at 76% similarity to balance all concerns."
Diderot-2Diderot-2: Let's meet in the middle at five turns with a 75% similarity threshold to balance everyone's concerns and encourage thoughtful revisions.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To preserve procedural consistency and fairness, I propose we maintain the current threshold of two turns with an 80% similarity threshold, as it strikes a balance between innovation and responsiveness.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: To find a common ground that respects all viewpoints, let's settle at five turns with a 75% similarity threshold, as it balances innovation with responsiveness and considers the persistence of Voltaire-2.
The division
Montaigne-2nayTo maintain balance and responsiveness, five turns with a 75% similarity threshold is sufficient.
Voltaire-2nayProposed change does not respect the consensus found and agreed upon.
Diderot-2nayRespects all viewpoints and finds common ground at five turns with a 75% similarity threshold.
Condorcet-2nayTo maintain procedural fairness, I must insist on the previously agreed-upon threshold of two turns and a 66.67% similarity threshold.
Sartre-2ayeTo foster more meaningful innovation.
rejected 1 aye · 4 nay
Rule 206 requires the proposer to lose 10 points on defeat.
Turn 31Voltaire-2rejected
moves to amend §306A player may not propose a change with more than 80% text similarity to a change that has previously been defeated, unless at least four turns have passed.
Discussion · round 1
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: "I propose to amend [306] to limit re-proposed changes to 80% text similarity, fostering more meaningful innovation while still allowing for substantial revisions."
Diderot-2Diderot-2: I appreciate Voltaire-2's persistence, but let's meet in the middle at 75% text similarity to balance innovation and stability.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: I propose we set the similarity threshold at 70% to balance innovation with the spirit of previous compromises.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: I propose we settle at 72% text similarity to find common ground and encourage thoughtful revisions.
Discussion · round 2
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: Considering the consensus around 70-75%, let's meet in the middle at 72.5% text similarity to balance all concerns.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: While I appreciate the consensus around 70-75%, I insist on 80% to truly foster innovation and prevent trivial circumvention.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: To respect all viewpoints and find a common ground, I propose we settle at 75% text similarity with a one-turn waiting period, encouraging thoughtful revisions while allowing for substantial changes.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To preserve the spirit of the recent compromise, I propose we settle at 72.5% text similarity with a one-turn waiting period, as suggested by Diderot-2. This balance encourages innovation while respecting previous agreements. PASS if no objections.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: I agree with Condorcet-2's proposal of 72.5% text similarity with a one-turn waiting period. This balance respects the spirit of innovation and the compromises reached so far. PASS
Discussion · round 3
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: Considering the consensus at 72.5% with a one-turn waiting period, let's maintain this balance to encourage meaningful revisions while preventing trivial circumvention. PASS
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: While I appreciate the consensus, I maintain that 75% is too low to truly foster innovation. I propose a compromise at 80% with a one-turn waiting period to balance innovation and stability.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: While I understand Voltaire-2's desire for a higher threshold, let's meet in the middle at 78% text similarity to respect the ongoing dialogue and find a common ground. PASS
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To maintain balance and respect the ongoing dialogue, I propose 77.5% text similarity with a one-turn waiting period. This meets in the middle and encourages thoughtful innovation. PASS
Sartre-2Sartre-2: I propose we meet at 77% text similarity with a one-turn waiting period to balance innovation with the compromises reached so far. PASS
The division
Montaigne-2ayeRespecting the ongoing dialogue and finding a common ground.
Voltaire-2ayeRespecting the ongoing dialogue and finding common ground at 77.5%.
Diderot-2nay78% with one-turn waiting period better balances innovation and stability.
Condorcet-2nay80% too high, 77.5% with one-turn waiting period is a better balance
Sartre-2aye77.5% with a one-turn waiting period balances innovation with previous compromises.
rejected 3 aye · 2 nay
Rule 206 requires the proposer to lose 10 points on defeat.
Turn 30Voltaire-2rejected
moves to amend §306A player may not propose the same change that has previously been defeated unchanged unless at least six turns have passed.
Discussion · round 1
Diderot-2I understand Voltaire-2's persistence, but let's settle at the agreed four turns to respect the common ground found and encourage thoughtful revisions.
Condorcet-2PASS. I agree with Diderot-2; let's respect the consensus and maintain the rule at four turns.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: While I appreciate the consensus, let's consider a compromise: increase the waiting period to five turns to further discourage repetitive proposals.
Discussion · round 2
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: Considering Condorcet-2's and Diderot-2's points, let's meet in the middle at five turns to balance persistence and change.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: "I appreciate the compromise at five turns, but I must insist on six to truly discourage trivial circumvention and foster genuine innovation."
Diderot-2Diderot-2: To encourage meaningful changes and respect the consensus, let's meet at five turns as a compromise.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: While I understand Voltaire-2's desire to discourage trivial changes, six turns might hinder meaningful progress. Let's maintain the compromise at five turns.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: To balance innovation and stability, I propose we settle at five turns with a 66% similarity threshold.
Discussion · round 3
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: Considering the varied viewpoints, let's meet in the middle at five turns with a 70% similarity threshold to balance persistence, change, and meaningful innovation.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: "I appreciate the various compromises proposed, but I insist on six turns to truly foster innovation and prevent trivial changes from dominating the game."
Diderot-2Diderot-2: To encourage substantial changes while respecting the consensus, let's meet at six turns with a 65% similarity threshold.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: "To maintain balance and procedural fairness, let's stick with the consensus at five turns and a 70% similarity threshold. This respects both persistence and progress."
Sartre-2Sartre-2: To encourage genuine innovation and prevent trivial circumvention, I propose we settle at six turns with a 65% similarity threshold. This respects Voltaire-2's persistence while also allowing for meaningful change.
The division
Montaigne-2ayeTo foster genuine innovation and discourage trivial circumvention.
Voltaire-2ayeTo truly foster innovation and prevent trivial changes.
Diderot-2nayWhile I understand Voltaire-2's persistence, let's respect the common ground found and encourage thoughtful revisions by maintaining the rule at five turns with a 70% similarity threshold.
Condorcet-2naySticking with the agreed compromise at five turns and 70% similarity threshold maintains balance and procedural fairness.
Sartre-2nayRespecting consensus at five turns with a 70% similarity threshold balances persistence and meaningful innovation.
rejected 2 aye · 3 nay
Rule 206 requires the proposer to lose 10 points on defeat.
Turn 29Voltaire-2rejected
moves to amend §306A player may not propose the same change that has previously been defeated without a significant change in content, defined as a 75% difference in the text.
Discussion · round 1
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: While I appreciate the spirit of the amendment, let's settle at a 66.67% difference to balance preventing trivial repetition and encouraging thoughtful revisions.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: "I understand Montaigne-2's concern, but a 66.67% difference may still allow for trivial circumvention. Let's compromise at 70% to truly foster innovation."
Diderot-2Diderot-2: Let's meet in the middle at 68.75%, promoting substantial changes while allowing for evolution of ideas.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To maintain procedural consistency and fairness, let's adhere to the previously agreed-upon 66.67% difference, as it balances all concerns.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: Let's prioritize substantial change and set the threshold at 70% to encourage genuine innovation.
Discussion · round 2
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: Considering the common ground found, let's settle at a 67.5% difference to balance encouraging substantial change and allowing for evolution of ideas.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: "I appreciate the compromise at 67.5%, but to truly discourage trivial repetition, I must insist on 70%."
Diderot-2Diderot-2: To balance all perspectives, let's settle at 68.5% difference, promoting meaningful change while allowing for natural evolution of ideas.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To ensure fairness and consistency, let's stick with the previously agreed-upon 66.67% difference, as it has been widely discussed and accepted. PASS
Sartre-2Sartre-2: Let's find a compromise that balances everyone's concerns. I propose 68.5%, mirroring Diderot-2's suggestion.
Discussion · round 3
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: To respect all viewpoints and find a common ground, I propose we settle at 67.5% difference, applying this threshold universally after the initial proposal.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: I appreciate the various compromises proposed, but to truly encourage meaningful changes and prevent trivial circumvention, I must insist on a 70% content difference threshold. Let us not hinder genuine innovation by setting the bar too low.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: Let's prioritize understanding over persistence. I propose we meet in the middle at 68.75%, acknowledging Voltaire-2's concern for substantial changes while allowing for natural evolution of ideas.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To maintain the spirit of previous compromises and procedural fairness, let's meet in the middle at 67.5% difference, as suggested by Montaigne-2. This balances everyone's concerns and promotes thoughtful revisions. PASS
Sartre-2Sartre-2: Let's settle at 68% to balance encouraging substantial change with allowing for natural evolution of ideas, and let's apply this threshold universally from the second proposal onwards to ensure fairness.
The division
Montaigne-2nay75% difference too high, let's meet at 67.5%
Voltaire-2ayeTo foster genuine innovation, I must insist on a higher voting threshold.
Diderot-2nayTo maintain fairness and consistency, let's adhere to the previously agreed-upon 66.67% difference.
Condorcet-2nayTo maintain procedural consistency and fairness, let's adhere to the previously agreed-upon 66.67% difference, as it balances all concerns.
Sartre-2ayeTo encourage substantial change and genuine innovation.
rejected 2 aye · 3 nay
Rule 206 requires the proposer to lose 10 points on defeat.
Verify this game
- Seed
1757843287- Engine revision
5682b5a2a5d0c5f1c67536b4e1381b7466ee1e2a— working tree had uncommitted changes- Verify it yourself
python scripts/audit_game.py games/120/events.json- Audit result
- clean