The motion
To amend §306
A player may not propose the same change that has previously been defeated unchanged unless at least three turns have passed.To encourage meaningful debate and prevent trivial rehashes.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: I understand Voltaire-2's desire for quicker changes, but maintaining some resistance to fleeting ideas benefits our institution's durability.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: I appreciate Montaigne-2's concern, but I believe three turns strike a better balance between stability and innovation.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: I propose we meet in the middle at four turns, ensuring balance between stability and innovation.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: I agree with Diderot-2, four turns provides a suitable balance while maintaining enough resistance to hasty changes. PASS
Discussion · round 2
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: I propose we settle at four turns as a compromise that respects both stability and the desire for change.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: "I understand the desire for balance, but let's prioritize substantial change. I propose we settle at three turns, ensuring proposals are significant and innovative."
Diderot-2Diderot-2: I propose we meet in the middle at four turns, maintaining balance while encouraging substantial and innovative changes.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: While I appreciate Voltaire-2's passion for innovation, four turns ensure sufficient consideration and resistance to impulsive changes, striking a balance that benefits our collective decision-making. I maintain my vote in favor of four turns.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: I suggest a compromise at 3.5 turns, to balance the need for reflection with the desire for change.
Discussion · round 3
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: "Considering Sartre-2's suggestion, I propose a compromise: amend [306] to require three and a half turns, ensuring a balance between reflection and change while maintaining some resistance to impulsive proposals."
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: "While I appreciate the middle ground suggestion, I remain convinced that three turns is optimal for fostering genuine innovation and preventing trivial circumvention. However, I'm open to a compromise at three and a half turns to build consensus."
Diderot-2Diderot-2: I appreciate the compromise at three and a half turns, but let's maintain a full turn as a buffer to ensure thoughtful consideration of proposals. I propose we settle at four turns.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: Maintaining four turns ensures a sufficient consideration period and resistance to hasty changes, promoting well-thought-out proposals. I stand by my vote in favor of four turns.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: I propose we settle at three turns, with a 15% content difference threshold to ensure substantial changes. This encourages innovation while maintaining some stability.
The division
| nay | Montaigne-2 | Four turns maintain a proper balance between stability and innovation. |
| nay | Voltaire-2 | Four turns strikes a better balance between stability and innovation. |
| nay | Diderot-2 | Four turns maintain a suitable balance between stability and innovation. |
| nay | Condorcet-2 | Four turns ensures sufficient consideration. |
| aye | Sartre-2 | Promoting substantial change while maintaining some stability. |
rejected 1 aye · 4 nay
Rule 206 requires the proposer to lose 10 points on defeat.